RAVINDRA SINGH Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In the accompanied writ application, the petitioner has prayed for direction upon the respondents for payment of honorarium from September, 2007 to February, 2009.

(2.) The brief facts as averred in the writ application is that the petitioner was initially appointed on the post of Computer Operator on contractual basis for the period of one year, vide memo No. 295 II, dated 21.08.2006 and joined the said post on 1st September, 2006 and since then the petitioner worked sincerely upto February, 2010 with utmost sincerity. It has been submitted that the petitioner was paid his honorarium upto August, 2007 and was allowed to work since February, 2010 but the payment of honorarium for the said period was not given to him though, the Circle Officer, Patan, Palamu (respondent No. 4) requested the Additional Collector, Palamu at Medininagar for extension of the period of service of the petitioner vide letter dated 08.07.2008 as per Annexure-4 to the writ application.

(3.) Mr. Kishor Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner, during course of argument, has submitted that on perusal of Annexures 4 to 6 of the writ application would suggest that the petitioner even after expiry of the contractual period has rendered services as Computer Operator for the period from September, 2007 to February, 2010. Being aggrieved by the inaction of the respondents in not paying the admissible honorarium for the period in question, the petitioner has been constrained to approach this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for redressal of his grievances.