Disposed

Ajit Kumar Panda v. Human Resources Department

Jharkhand HC4 Jan 2017WPC/4334/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought recognition as an Assistant Teacher, claiming he was appointed in 1986. Court directed him to file a representation with the Director for redressal based on a 2012 Government policy for pre-1989 appointees, ignoring the Alam Committee order.

What did the court decide?

Directed petitioner to file representation with Respondent No. 3 for redressal under 2012 policy; authority to pass reasoned order within eight weeks.

Ajit Kumar Panda Vs Human Resources… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Jharkhand HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(S) No. 4334 of 2016

¶2

Ajit Kumar Panda, son of Kalipada Panda. Assistant Teacher, Project Girls' High School, Dumariya, Singhbhum West, resident of village Bhalukpatra, P.O. & P.S. Dumariya, Singhbhum East ... Petitioner.

¶3

Versus

¶4

The State of Jharkhand.

¶5

The Principal Secretary, Department of Human Resources Development, Government of Jharkhand, Telephone Bhawan, P.O. & P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi, Jharkhand.

¶6

The Director (Secondary Education), Department of Human Resources Development, Government of Jharkhand, P.O. & P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi, Jharkhand.

¶7

The District Education Officer, Singhbhum East Jamshedpur, P.O. & P.S. Jamshedpur, District Singhbhum East, Jharkhand. …... Respondents.

¶8

CORAM :HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANDA SEN

¶9

For the Petitioner : Mrs.Subha Jha, Advocate. For the Respondents : J.C. to G.A.IV

¶10

02/04.01.2017: This application has been filed for a direction upon the respondents to recognize the services of the petitioner as Assistant Teacher in the Project Girls' High School, Dumariya, Singhbhum East.

¶11

It is submitted that the case of the petitioner has not been considered by the respondents only on the ground that he is an untrained teacher.

¶12

It is undisputed that the petitioner has been appointed in the year 1986. However, in the year 2012, vide memo no. 2743 dated 06.10.2012, the Government of Jharkhand has taken a policy decision that the services of such trained and untrained teachers will be taken into account for recognition, who were appointed till 04.02.1989.

¶13

Under the said circumstances, I direct the petitioner to file a representation before the Director (Secondary Education), Department of Human Resources Development, Govt. of Jharkhand (Respondent no.3) for redressal of his grievance. If such representation is filed, the respondent no.3 shall pass a reasoned order after taking into consideration the policy decision taken by the Govt. of Jharkhand within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of such representation. It is made clear that the authority will take into consideration the policy decision taken by the Govt. of Jharkhand and not the order passed by the Alam Committee.

¶14

With the above observation and direction, this writ application is disposed of.

¶15

( ANANDA SEN , J)

¶16

Sharma/-

Ajit Kumar Panda v. Human Resources Department

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ajit Kumar Panda v. Human Resources Department

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

Durga Sharma Alias Durga Kumari Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Seraj Khan Alias Md Seraj Khan Vs The State Of Jharkhand And Anr.

Ms Rospa Builders And Developers Pvt. Ltd. Through Its Managing Director Roshan Kumar Surin Vs The State Of Jharkhand And Anr.

Deo Datt Singh Vs Education

Sahdev Mahto And Ors. Vs Human Resources Department

Smt Pravawati Kumari And Anr. Vs Human Resources Department