SURESH KUMAR TIWARY Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In the captioned writ application, the petitioner has inter alia prayed for direction upon the respondents to regularize the services of the petitioner in the scale of Assistant Teacher w.e.f 01.05.1993 i.e. the date from which the sanctioned post fell vacant; and further prayer has been made for quashing order dated 29.03.2009 passed by Director, Secondary Education whereby the representation of the petitioner for regularization of his services has been rejected.

(2.) The facts, as delineated in the writ application, in brief is that initially the petitioner was appointed as Teacher in Yogda Satsanga Madhya Vidyalaya on 26.08.1976 and thereafter was appointed in Yogda Satsanga Vidyalaya (High School) on 19.04.1984. It has been averred that one post of Science Teacher fell vacant on and from 01.05.1993 on account of retirement of one Mrs. Indira Majumdar. After retirement of said Mrs. Indira Majumdar, advertisement was published for appointment on the said post, in which, the petitioner participated and was selected. Accordingly, he joined on the said post on 26.05.1999. It has further been averred that the Secretary, Yogda Satsand Vidyalaya vide letter dated 21.10.2000 made a request to the D.E.O that petitioner's service may be regularized w.e.f 01.05.1993 as the petitioner is working on the sanctioned post since that date. Thereafter, the Secretary of the said school again made request to regularize the services of the petitioner w.e.f 01.05.1993 in the light of resolution taken in the Managing Committee meeting held on 26th June, 2001, but it did not evoke any response. Being aggrieved, the petitioner approached this Court by filing W.P. (S) No. 4818 of 2007, which was disposed of vide order dated 18.02008 with liberty to the petitioner to file a fresh representation before the Director, Secondary Education, who shall pass speaking order thereon. With the liberty aforesaid, the petitioner submitted a representation before the Director, Secondary Education but the same was rejected by passing order dated 29.03.2009, which is impugned in the instant writ application.

(3.) Heard Mr. Vijay Bahadur Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Dhananjay Kumar Dubey, learned Sr. S.C. I for the respondents-State. Notice upon respondent no. 5-Secretary of the school and respondent no. 6 - Principal of the school has been validly served but none appears on behalf of respondent nos. 5 and 6.