FR.JAMES TOPPO Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing for the respondents.

(2.) THE only grievance of the petitioner is that while calculating the total period of service, the respondent has not taken into account the period of service rendered by the petitioner from 10.5.1975 to 31.7.1988, rather the authority has taken into account only the period of service from 1.8.1988 to 31.10.2001 and on that basis fixation of the pension has been made which is quite improper as the authority have excluded the period from 10.5.1975 to 31.7.1988 though during that period the petitioner had worked as Assistant Teacher but that period has been excluded only on the ground, as has been disclosed in the counter affidavit, that the period rendered by the petitioner from 10.5.1975 to 31.7.1988 was not approved by the competent authority, though at that time there was no need for having approval of the service of the teacher of minority aided school, rather the appointment needed to be verified by the District Education Officer and in fact the then District Education Officer had scrutinized the matter relating to appointment of the petitioner and only on verification being made by the then District Education Officer the salary was paid and as such, exclusion of that period is not only illegal but it is also arbitrary.

(3.) IN that view of the matter, this application is disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to file a fresh representation before the District Education Officer, Ranchi, respondent no. 3 along with a copy of this order within a period of three weeks and "the respondent no. 3 on getting representation will be taking decision in the matter within a period of six weeks.