CHANDRADEO SINGH Vs. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the parties.

(2.) Though the petitioner has made several prayer but after some arguments, he confined his prayer to the payment of salary for the intervening period from 04.08.2005 to 17.04.2007.

(3.) The petitioner was appointed provisionally as night guard in the pay scale of Rs. 701/280 vide letter No. 178 dated 21.12.1971 issued under the signature of the District Family Planning Officer, District Family Planning Bureau, West Singhbhum, Chaibasa. In pursuant to the advertisement, the petitioner applied for the post of night guard and he was appointed as a night guard on contract basis vide letter No. 7 dated 01.01.1973 issued under the signature of District Family Planning Officer, Chaibasa. It has been stated that the petitioner was promoted as Family Planning Worker from the date of his joining vide office order as contained in Memo No. 20 dated 001987 issued under the signature of the Civil Surgeon-cum-chief Medical Officer, Hazaribagh. Thereafter, the petitioner served in the department and he is having unblemished service record. It has further been stated that some irregularities were detected in the appointment of the incumbent in the Health Department and as such the Chief Secretary, Bihar Patna vide his letter dated 19.06.1999 directed for an enquiry to be conducted regarding the illegal appointments. Pursuant to the directions, the petitioner's salary was stopped. The In-charge, Medical Officer, Primary Health Centre, Markacho vide his letter No. 51 dated 05.02.2004 informed the Civil Surgeon-cum-Chief Medical Officer regarding appointment of the petitioner, whereby it was brought to the notice of the Civil Surgeon-cum-Chief Medical Officer that the appointment of the petitioner has been made prior to 01.01.197 Since the appointment of the petitioner has been made prior to 01.01.1980, the petitioner does not come within the purview of letter No. 696 (22) dated 19.06.1999 issued under the signature of Chief Secretary, Bihar Patna, whereby a full-fledged enquiry was directed to be conducted. Though, his appointment was prior to 01.01.1980 but the petitioner was served with an office order vide Memo No. 27 dated 06.12.2003 under the signature of Chief Surgeon-cum-Chief Medical Officer, Koderma, whereby he has directed that in the light of illegal appointment made on or after 01.01.1980 though out the State Level, Divisional Level and District Level. The Enquiry Committee has found the petitioner's appointment to be illegal, hence, the petitioner was directed to submit an explanation within ten days of the receipt of letter. The petitioner has filed detailed explanation on 12.01.2004 stating therein that the petitioner's services cannot be terminated on the ground that he was appointed on 21.12.1971 and as such he does not fall within the category of appointment made subsequent to 01.01.1980. In pursuance to the enquiry, the petitioner along with others were terminated from service vide order dated 16.02005 as contained in Memo No. 257. The other similarly situated persons challenged the order of termination in WPS Nos. 1561 of 2005 and 1801 of 2005 respectively in the Honourable High Court and the Honourable Court vide its order dated 15.07.2005 was pleased to quash the office order No. 1257 dated 16.02005 with a direction and observation that "in view of the above discussion, these writ applications are allowed; the impugned part of order by which the petitioners' salary have been stopped and they have been prevented from discharging their duties are quashed. Since the petitioners were illegally and without any reasonable cause prevented from discharging their duties, they are held entitled to get full salary of the intervening period."