Allowed

Binod Kant Tiwari v. Education

Jharkhand HC10 Mar 2017WPC/3287/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Jharkhand, Ranchi, in a writ petition, directed the Registrar of Ranchi University to decide the petitioner's objection regarding his date of absorption. The Court also ordered payment of arrears of salary based on a previous order.

What did the court decide?

Registrar directed to decide objection on date of absorption; petition directed to pay arrears of salary within six weeks.

Binod Kant Tiwari Vs Education — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Jharkhand HC (2017)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI W.P.(S) No. 3287 of 2016

¶3

¶4

Binod Kant Tiwari, son of late Nand Kumar Tiwari, resident of Vikas Nagar, Village-Chandwe, P.O.-Gandhinagar, P.S.-Kanke, Dist.-Ranchi

¶5

..... Petitioner

¶6

--Versus--

¶7

1.The State of Jharkhand, through the Secretary, Department of Higher and Technical Education, Nepal House, P.O.-Doranda, P.S.-Doranda, District-Ranchi

¶8

2.Director, Department of Higher and Technical Education, Govt. of Jharkhand Nepal House, P.O.-Doranda, P.S.-Doranda, District-Ranchi 3.Ranchi University, through its Vice Chancellor having its office at Ranchi University Campus, P.O.-GPO, P.S.-Kotwali, Dist.-Ranchi 4.Registrar, Ranchi University, having its office at Ranchi University Campus, P.O.-GPO, P.S. Kotwali, Dist.-Ranchi

¶9

…. Respondents

¶10

¶11

CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SHREE CHANDRASHEKHAR

¶12

¶13

For the Petitioner : Mr. Shresth Gautam, Advocate Mr. Om, Advocate For the Resp.-R.U. : Mr. Amit Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Lalan Kr. Singh, JC to G.P.-I ---

¶14

6 / 10.03.2017 Multiple prayers have been made by the petitioner in the

¶15

writ-petition. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that insofar as, payment of arrears of salary to the petitioner is concerned, this Court by an order dated 30.10.2007 passed in W.P.(S) No.7059 of 2006 directed the respondent-University to pay arrears of salary as well as current salary to the petitioner. Relevant abstract of order dated 30.10.2007 reads as under :

¶16

“Accordingly, the respondent-University is directed to make payment of the arrears of salary as well as current salary of the petitioners till final decision is taken in the matter of regularization of the services of the petitioners by the competent authority.”

¶17

2. Order passed in W.P.(S) No.7059 of 2006 was not challenged by the respondents and thus, it has become final. Accordingly, the Registrar, Ranchi University-respondent no.4 is directed to take necessary steps for payment of legally payable arrears of salary to the petitioner within six weeks. This takes care of prayer at Clause-(C).

¶18

Insofar as, prayers at Clause-(D), (E) and (F) are concerned,

¶19

¶20

the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that these grievances can be looked into only after the date of absorption of the petitioner in service is finally decided. Main prayer in the writ-petition is for a direction to the respondent-University to take a decision on the objection dated 03.09.2005 in respect of date of absorption of the petitioner. Prayer at Clause-(B), in the aforesaid facts, cannot be adjudicated till a final decision is taken by the respondent-University on the objection preferred by the petitioner.

¶21

In the proceeding of W.P.(S) No.7059 of 2006 the respondent -Ranchi University took a stand that a decision was taken by the Syndicate of the University in its meeting held on 14.07.2005, however, subject to approval of the State Government. The petitioner's objection is to the aforesaid decision by which his date of absorption has been fixed as 09.05.1988. This decision is reflected in Notification dated 05.08.2005. Obviously, unless a decision on the objection which was invited by the Ranchi University in respect of date of absorption of the petitioner is finally decided, approval of the State Government cannot be sought.

¶22

Four weeks' time for filing the counter-affidavit was granted to the respondent-University vide order dated 10.01.2017, however, a counter-affidavit has not been filed by the respondent-University. Considering the nature of grievance raised by the petitioner in the present proceeding I am not inclined to grant further time for filing counter-affidavit in the matter.

¶23

Accordingly, the respondent no.-4 is directed to take necessary steps for a decision by the competent authority/Syndicate on the objection dated 03.09.2005 of the petitioner.

¶24

The writ-petition stands allowed in the aforesaid terms and to the aforesaid extent.

¶25

(Shree Chandrashekhar, J.)

¶26

SI/..

Binod Kant Tiwari v. Education

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Binod Kant Tiwari v. Education

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Krishna Thakur And Ors. Vs State of Jharkhand And Ors.

Chhotan Ram Vs the State of Jharkhand and Ors.

Joseph Kullu And Ors. Vs Human Resources Department

Asutosh Kumar Vs State of Jharkhand And Ors.

Baidyanath Labh Vs State of Jharkhand And Ors.

Usha Kiran Tirkey Vs State of Jharkhand And Ors.