SOBHNATH SAHU Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In the captioned writ application, prayer has been made by the petitioner for quashing of the order dtd. 29/3/2010 passed by the respondent no.5-District Superintendent of Education, Simdega, pertaining to cancellation of pay scale which was granted to the petitioner in Graduate Trained pay scale on 13/2/1992 by virtue of passing the Training examination on 5/5/1986, whereby recovery of excess amount has been ordered without giving opportunity of being heard to the petitioner. Further prayer has been made for direction to the respondents to pay the Science Graduate Trained pay scale.

(2.) The factual matrix, in brief is that, in pursuance to advertisement for appointment of Assistant Teacher the petitioner was initially appointed as Assistant Teacher by office order dtd. 16/4/1987. Since the petitioner passed his training examination on 5/5/1986, he was granted B.Sc. Trained pay scale by office order dtd. 13/2/1992 as evident from Annexure-2 to the writ petition. Accordingly, pay of the petitioner has been fixed in the said scale. The B.Sc. trained pay scale of the petitioner has been approved by the Finance Department, Govt. of Jharkhand. It has been averred in the writ application that in case of other similarly placed employee namely Sanjay Nath Deogharia and Ors., B.Sc. Trained pay scale was cancelled. Being aggrieved by the said order, said Sanjay Nath Deogharia filed a writ petition before the Hon'ble Patna High Court (Ranchi Bench) being C.W.J.C No.1061 of 1994(R) and the order of cancellation was set aside by this Court as evident from Annexure-4 to the writ petition. In the light of the said order the State authority issued the office order dtd. 28/4/1995. But all of a sudden without giving any opportunity B.Sc. trained scale of the petitioner which was granted on 13/2/1992 was cancelled by the impugned order dtd. 29/3/2010 vide Annexure-6 to the writ application. Being aggrieved by the impugned order dtd. 29/3/2010, the petitioner left with no alternative has been constrained to approach this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for redressal of his grievances.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has strenuously urged that the action of the respondent no.5- District Superintendent of Education, Simdega as contained in order dtd. 29/3/2010 vide Annexure-6 to the writ application is without jurisdiction, arbitrary, illegal and unconstitutional and amounts to colourable exercise of power. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the impugned order is violative of the principles of natural justice, as at no point of time prior to passing of the impugned order opportunity of hearing was given to the petitioner, therefore, there has been breach of principles of natural justice. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that Bihar (now Jharkhand) Taken Over Elementary School Teachers Promotion Rules, 1993 could not be made applicable retrospectively so as to take away the accrued right and the benefit as has been decided by the Hon'ble High Court as well as the Hon'ble Apex Court. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the impugned order also suffers from vice of rule of estoppel.