TULSI MAHTO Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AGGRIEVED by notification dated 27.05.2014 whereby, one Dr. Satyendra Kumar Choudhary, was directed to take additional charge of Director, RIMS till further orders and seeking a direction upon the respondents to permit the petitioner to act as ProfessorcumHead of Department, FMT, RIMS, the present writ petition has been filed. The learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner stated that order dated 09.02.2015 has been issued by the respondentState of Jharkhand whereby, the petitioner has been permitted to work on the post of ProfessorcumHead of Department, FMT, RIMS and vide letter dated 01.05.2015, the Accountant General (Accounts and Entitlement) of Jharkhand has been directed to issue salary slip to the petitioner for the said post. Thus, the second prayer in the writ petition has become infructuous.

(2.) BRIEFLY stated, the facts narrated in the writ petition are that, the petitioner who was appointed as Director, RIMS vide notification dated 23.12.2010, successfully completed his tenure of three years on 23.12.2013. The tenure as Director, RIMS was however, extended vide notification dated 26.12.2013, till further orders. The petitioner claimed that his tenure should have been extended for further two years because on the date when he completed his three years' tenure as Director, RIMS, he was below 60 years. It is asserted that, respondent no. 5 is not borne in the teaching cadre of RIMS and therefore, he is not eligible to hold the post of Director, RIMS.

(3.) MR . Anil Kumar Sinha, the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the appointment of the petitioner was pursuant to decision of the Selection Committee and advertisement dated 18.09.2010 provided that the tenure of three years as Director, RIMS may be extended for further two years after evaluation of service rendered, subject to maximum age of 62 years. The petitioner thus was entitled for extension for further two years as, he had not completed 60 years as on 23.12.2013. However, vide notification dated 27.05.2014, the respondent no. 5 has been directed to take additional charge of Director, RIMS. It is submitted that the appointment of respondent no. 5 is not in terms of Rajendra Medical Institute Rules, 2002 and in the garb of holding additional charge of Director, RIMS, the respondent no. 5 cannot be permitted to function on the said post for an indefinite period. Referring to various notifications by which the respondent no. 5 has been transferred and finally given additional charge of Director, RIMS, the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submitted that permitting a person who is not eligible for appointment on the post of Director, RIMS, for an indefinite period, is not in public interest.