SHIV KUMAR SINGH Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this writ application, the petitioner has prayed for a direction to the respondents to treat the petitioner with other similarly situated persons and send his name for the purpose of appointment to the post of Panchayat Sewak after giving him the benefit of age relaxation as has been given to other similarly situated persons. It has been stated that the persons, similarly, situated, and even two persons junior to him have been given promotion to the post of Panchayat Sewak.

(2.) THE petitioner 'scase is that in a meeting of Executive Committee held on 05.10.1988 for consideration of the appointment on the post of Dalpati, the petitioner 'sname was recommended and accordingly he was appointed as Dalpati at Baraini Panchayat of District Chatra. His appointment was approved by the District Panchayati Raj Officer by memo No. 78 Mu. Dated 16.06.1988 (Annexure -2). The petitioner claims that since thereafter he has been continuously serving as Dalpati and getting monthly allowance according to the prescribed rules. He has undergone the compulsory training prescribed for Dalpatis and successfully completed the same. In the year 1995, the respondent No. 5 informed the petitioner that original certificates are required for the purpose of his appointment on the sanctioned post of Panchayat Sewaks. The petitioner, accordingly, submitted his certificates and other required documents. However, at that time, he could not be appointed because his name was below in the seniority list of Dalpatis. In the year 2000, the respondent No. 9 was informed that two villagers of Bairani and Koladih Panchayats, namely, Kamaldeo Singh and Arjun Sao respectively have complained against the petitioner 'sappointment as Dalpati alleging that at the time of the appointment, the petitioners 'sfather was the mukhki of the panchayat and who constituted the executive committee. Accordingly, the petitioner was given a show cause notice. The petitioner filed his reply denying the allegations. The matter was inquired into and the Deputy Commissioner, Chatra found that the appointment was approved long back in the year 1988 and on such allegation his services cannot be terminated after several years. The matter was, thus, closed by order dated 21.07.2000 giving a liberty to the aggrieved party to agitate the matter before any appropriate authority. The said matter was, thereafter, never agitated. The grievance of the petitioner is that in the seniority list of Dalpatis, the name of the petitioner stands at Sl. No. 32 and he should have been given the age relaxation and other concessions in accordance with the Government circular dated 07.05.2002 for the purpose of appointment to the post of Panchyat Sewaks, but the same has not been done on the plea of some complaint concerning his appointment to the post of Dalpati pendency of the matter before some higher authority.

(3.) LEARNED Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that the respondents have arbitrarily discriminated the petitioner and without any sufficient reason, have denied the equal treatment to him. Learned Counsel submitted that the allegation against his first appointment to the post of Dalpati was inquired into at different levels and ultimately the matter was finally closed by the Deputy Commissioner, as far back as in the year 2000. Liberty was given to the concerned persons to raise grievances against the petitioner 'sfirst appointment before an appropriate authority. Neither the order of the deputy Commissioner was challenged nor any appropriate step was taken challenging the petitioner 'sappointment as Dalpati. According to him after lapse of several years a frivolous plea is being taken for denying his valuable legal rights and not sending his name for appointment to the post of Panchayat Sewak.