RAJENDRA SINGH Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has approached this court with a prayer for quashing the decision taken by the Committee, constituted by the Secretary-cum-Commissioner, Commercial Department, vide memo no. 3604 dated 27.8.2015, whereby the committee has declined to regularize the services of the petitioner by the decision dated 11.2.2016. Further prayer has been made to regularize the services of the petitioner from the date of his initial appointment.

(2.) An advertisement was floated vide letter dated 10.5.1979 by Commercial Taxes Commissioner for appointment against the post created by memo no. 3408 dated 27.3.1979 for Gumla Check Post and Gumla Check Centre. Vide office order dated 9.8.1979, a Selection Committee was constituted, consisting of three members for appointment as per the advertisement. The name of the petitioner was registered in the employment exchange bearing registration no. C3180/1977, as the petitioner had already completed his graduation and as such got himself registered before the employment exchange, Ranchi, for getting employment. As the petitioner was registered before the Employment Exchange, he was called for an interview for appointment on the post of Peon which was held on 10.8.1979 in which the petitioner along with others appeared and accordingly result of successful candidates were published on 25.10.1979. The petitioner along with others were appointed on the post of peon in the pay scale of Rs. 144-1-160-2-190 vide office order no. 2291 dated 19.11.1979. It has been further stated that after joining of the service, the petitioner discharged his duties with utmost sincerity and to the utmost satisfaction of all the concerned authorities. It is further case of the petitioner that vide resolution no. 2215 dated 11.1985 issued by the Personnel & Administrative Department for appointment of Class IV employees of Finance, Commercial Taxes Department, Government of Bihar, the case of the petitioner along with several others was considered for fresh appointment on the post of Clerk as the petitioner was having requisite qualification, as he was a graduate and as such he was granted appointment on the post of clerk from the date of their joining vide office order dated 23.1988 and the name of the petitioner found place at sl. no. 7. The petitioner states that as he fulfills the requisite qualifications, he was appointed on the post of Clerk. It is specific case of the petitioner that he was appointed in Gumla Check Post and its affairs were taken care by the Ranchi Administrative Office itself. The petitioner served the Gumla Check Post to the utmost satisfaction of the Department.

(3.) The petitioner was also transferred on several occasions from one district to another by the Department and was given all the allowances save and except Assured Career Progression (ACP). It is specific case of the petitioner that as the petitioner was serving the department since long that is from the date of initial appointment i.e. 1979 but their cases were not considered for regularization and as such they moved the Hon'ble High Court in W.P.(S) No. 869 of 2013 for a direction to the respondent-state for consideration of their cases for regularization. In view of State of Karnataka v. Uma Devi & Ors. reported in 2006 (4) SCC 1, judgment the Hon'ble court after hearing the parties made a specific direction to the state to consider the case of petitioners in view of the notification no. 1348 dated 12.2015 wherein a rule was framed for regularization of the services of the employees who have been irregularly appointed and are working in the State of Jharkhand. The respondent-State in view of the order and direction of this Hon'ble Court made in W.P.(S) No. 869 of 2013 and analogous cases rejected the case of petitioner vide its order dated 11.2.2016 on the ground that the initial appointment of the petitioner was not on a sanctioned post.