DR. SHAILENDRA KUMAR SINHA Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The brief facts, as averred in i he writ application is that against the order of dismissal, petitioner approached in CWJC No. 735 of 1998 which was disposed of vide order dated 27.2.1998 with a direction for quashing the impugned order of suspension and with liberty to the petitioner to appear before the respondents on or before 31.3.1998. In pursuance to order passed in the aforesaid writ application, the petitioner appeared before the concerned respondent on 28.3.1998 and submitted his joining, which has been received by the concerned respondents. Though, the joining of petitioner has been accepted but he was put under suspension vide memo dated 12th Feb., 1999 in contemplation of departmental proceedings with a direction to give his reporting in the office of the Director, Animal Husbandry and Research Institute, Ranchi. Thereafter, the petitioner submitted his joining report to the Headquarter on 26.4.1999, as per Annexure-3 to the writ application. Since, the petitioner was put under suspension on 12th Feb., 1999, the petitioner has prayed for grant of arrears of salary for the period from 28.3.1998 to 12.2.1999. Due to inaction on the part of the respondents, the petitioner has been constrained to approach this Court under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India for redressal of his grievance.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has strenuously urged that the petitioner has approached this Honourable Court, bringing on record the order passed by the Honourable Patna High Court, vide Annexure-1 to the writ application and the petitioner has submitted his joining on 28th March, 1998, which has been duly received by the concerned respondents but on 12th Feb., 1999 the order of suspension was passed. Therefore, the delay which has been caused by the respondents in not taking action for the arrear salary, reflects the conduct of the respondents. Therefore, the petitioner is entitled to the salary for the aforesaid period. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that nonpayment of the salary for the said period is violative of Art. 300(A) of the Constitution of India.

(3.) Repudiating the contentions made in the writ application, a counteraffidavit has been filed by the respondents. In the counter-affidavit, it has been submitted that in compliance of the order dated 27.2.1998 passed by the Court, the petitioner appeared before the Commissioner, Animal Husbandry Department, Bihar, Patna on 28.1998 with a written representation dated 28.1998 but the department treated that the petitioner's claim is not genuine and legal. Further, the counter-affidavit dated 4.2012 has been filed by the respondents mainly dwelling upon the dismissal of the petitioner due to involvement in Fodder Scam cases but the counter-affidavit does not mention about the period in question.