RAGHWENDRA MISHRA Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER was appointed on the post of Assistant -cum -Typist on 20 th of December, 1985. The service of the petitioner came to be terminated alongwith two others on 29 th of May, 1986 on the ground of their appointment, being illegal, having been made without any selection. It appears that on some representation, the termination of the petitioner and others was kept in abeyance by order dated 21 st June, 1986 and have continued to perform their duties. Their pay -scale was revised. While performing their duties, petitioner and others approached this Court in C.W.J.C. No. 1026 of 1998 and claimed for redesignation on a higher post of Typist of Secretariat level/This writ petition came to be dismissed vide judgment dated 16 th August, 1999 with the following observations:

(2.) THEREAFTER vide letter dated 29 th of May, 2001, the initial termination order of the petitioner and others dated 29 th of May, 1980 was revived and petitioner and others were again terminated. The order of termination was again ordered to be kept in abeyance vide Communication dated 20 th of September, 2001 issued by the Additional Secretary to the Government, Ministry of Forest and Environment, Government of Jharkhand to the Chief Conservator of Forests, Ranchi. A direction was issued that the order of keeping in abeyance the termination be implemented. The Chief Conservator of Forests, however, instead of implementing the order responded vide his Communication dated 12 th October, 2001. Besides giving the details of the circumstances under which the petitioner was terminated also desired amendment of the letter dated 20 th of September, 2001 in so far the status and Grade of the petitioner is concerned. There is large correspondence on record amongst the officials. It appears from this correspondence that the order of (sic) termination dated 20 th of September, 2001 was not implemented for one or the other reason and the petitioner continued to represent even till 2006. Even in 2006, there is a correspondence between the Chief Conservator of Forests to the Government, which clearly indicates that the issue of reinduction of the petitioner into service continued to remain undecided. Petitioner has filed this petition claiming salary from May, 2001 till the date of filing of the writ petition on the ground that mere pendency of the file does not disentitle the petitioner to claim the salary.

(3.) IN the above circumstances, the Respondents are directed to decide the issue of reinduction of the petitioner within a period of two months from today.