TARA SINHA Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) During the pendency of the writ petition, the original petitioner, namely Vidya Sagar Choudhary died and his wife namely, Tara Singh has been substituted vide order dtd. 4/5/2022.

(2.) The original petitioner had approached this Court with a prayer for quashing the order dtd. 12/11/2011 as contained in Memo No.7435(S) issued by the then Deputy Secretary, Road Construction Department, Govt. of Jharkhand, whereby 10 % deduction from pension of the petitioner has been ordered. Further, prayer has been made for a direction upon the respondents to release and pay the arrears of 10 % pension with interest from the date of his retirement to till date and also to pay full pension for which the petitioner is entitled for.

(3.) As per the factual matrix, the case of the original petitioner is that the petitioner joined the Public Works Department (Road Construction Department), Bihar on 15/4/1973 as an Assistant Engineer and later on promoted to the post of Executive Engineer on 3/1/1997 and posted in the Department of Rural Engineering Organization, Govt. of Bihar at Ranchi. After bifurcation of the State of Bihar, the services of the petitioner was allocated to the State of Jharkhand and petitioner joined as Executive Engineer in the Department of National Rural Employment Project in the year, 2001. During his tenure of Office, he was entrusted with the work of construction of a Boys Hostel in the premises of Sona Hatu High School appertaining to Plot No.1812, Khata No.3, for which a sum of Rs.9.00 lacs were released on 16/9/2004 as a first installment for construction work. Accordingly, the construction work was started on the land so earmarked and provided by the School Management Committee in consultation of MESO Department, who inspected the site premises also and after being satisfied, released the further installment of the fund. When the work was in progress, one Chaitan Singh Munda, filed an application before the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Bundu for initiation of proceeding under Sec. 144 of the Cr.P.C. on 17/5/2005 vide Miscellaneous Case No.6/2005, claiming that the land on which the hostel was being constructed belonged to him and the same is Raiyati Land. The said Chaitan Singh Munda also filed a writ petition bearing W.P.(C) No.2950/2005 before this Court to stop construction over the land in which the petitioner was not a party. This Court after hearing the parties, vide order dtd. 22/6/2005, adjourned the matter and observed that "during the pendency of the writ petition, the respondents will act as per the order dtd. 17/5/2005 passed by the SDO, Bundu in case No.M.P.6/2005, if the said order has not been superseded by any Court of law/Authority'. But the said order as well as order passed by the SDO, Bundu was not communicated by the Department to the petitioner and finally, aforesaid writ petition was dismissed for default on 7/5/2012. After completion of the work, the hostel was handed over to the School Management on 1/12/2006 itself. It is specific case of the petitioner that during the construction of building, nobody pointed out that the land on which the hostel building is being constructed, was disputed on the point of title or possession and after proper verification by the higher officials as well as school management, full payment was made. But surprisingly, on the date of retirement i.e., on 31/1/2007, a letter bearing No.211 dtd. 31/1/2007 issued by the Secretary, Welfare Department addressed to the Secretary, Road Construction Department alleged that the construction of the hostel was not on the piece of land where the foundation was laid. Contrary to that as alleged in the said letter, the petitioner on several occasions was requested to discontinue construction work, but still the petitioner proceeded ahead with the same. On the basis of said letter, a departmental proceeding was initiated against the petitioner and also after issuing second show cause notice and reply filed by the petitioner, he was found guilty of the charges and as such, vide impugned order dtd. 12/11/2011, 10 % pension of the original petitioner was stopped permanently. Aggrieved by the same, he had knocked the door of this Court.