JANARDAN MISHRA SON OF LATE SHIV CHARAN MISHRA RETIRED AS INCHARGE HEAD MASTER, HIGH SCHOOL AT PRESENT RESIDENT OF NEW COLONY BARHI, P.O., P.S. BARHI, DIST : HAZARIBAGH Vs. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In the accompanied writ application, the petitioner inter alia, prayed for quashing the order dated 20.03.2013, issued by the Director, Secondary Education, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi (Respondent No. 4) as contained in Annexure-5, wherein, prayer for counting the previous services rendered by the petitioner in the Government Middle School, as Teacher from 10.05.1967 to 21.02.1979 been rejected.

(2.) Bereft of unnecessary details, the facts as disclosed in the writ application is that, the petitioner having the requisite qualification, was appointed by the competent authority as an Assistant Teacher in Barhi Middle School, Keredari, Hazaribagh in the sanctioned vacant post vide appointment letter dated 20.04.1967 and in pursuance to the said appointment order, the petitioner joined the said post on 10.05.1967. After joining the said post, the petitioner continued to discharge his duties in different places. When the vacancies arose in the High School for Sanskrit Teacher, the petitioner having the requisite qualification applied for the said post and accordingly, he was appointed in the Government High School and he joined on 22.02.1979 in the Government High School in the Hazaribagh district after being relieved on 21.02.1979, as is evident from Annexure-2 to the writ application. The petitioner sent his resignation letter to the District Superintendent of Education, Hazaribagh and the same was accepted by the District Superintendent of Education, Hazaribagh. The petitioner retired with effect from 30.06.2008 on attaining the age of superannuation and after retirement, the respondent decided the pension of the petitioner excluding the services rendered by the petitioner in the Middle School as regular appointees from 10.05.1967 to 21.02.1979. The petitioner approached the authorities but it was not considered by the authorities, therefore, the petitioner approached this Court by filing a writ application being W.P. (S) No. 1931 of 2012, which was disposed of vide order dated 13.07.2012, directing the petitioner to file representation before the Respondent No. 4, who in turn, will decide the claim of the petitioner. However, in pursuance to contempt case (C) No. 1088 of 2012, the respondent authority passed an order dated 20.03.2013, vide Annexure-5 to the writ application, refusing to count the total period rendered by the petitioner for the purpose of deciding the pension and other pensionary benefits, which is impugned in this writ application.

(3.) Heard Mr. Binod Kumar Dubey, learned counsel for the petitioner, Ms. Ruchi Rampuria, learned J.C. to Sr. S.C. I, appearing for the Respondent-State as well as Mr. Sudarshan Shrivastava, learned counsel appearing for the Respondent No. 5.