Dismissed

MD Mahiruddin v. the State of Jharkhand and Ors.

Jharkhand HC5 Apr 2018LPA/58/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A Letters Patent Appeal was dismissed where the appellant claimed appointment as Head Clerk. The Court held the post did not exist, the sanctioning authority lacked jurisdiction, and the retirement letter claiming such post had no legal value, upholding the Single Judge's writ dismissal.

What did the court decide?

Dismissed the Letters Patent Appeal and the Independent Application No. 2350 of 2018.

MD Mahiruddin Vs the State of Jharkhand… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Jharkhand HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI L.P.A. No. 58 of 2017

¶2

With

¶3

I.A. No. 2350 of 2018

¶4

Md. Mahiruddin, Son of Shekh Dukha, resident of Village- Parsa, P.O. K.Parsa, P.S. Godda, District- Godda … Appellant

¶5

-Versus-

¶6

The State of Jharkhand

¶7

The Director, Higher Education, Human Resource Development Department, Govt. of Jharkhand, P.O. & P.S. Doranda, District- Ranchi

¶8

Secretary, Human Resource Development Department, Govt. of Jharkhand, P.O. & P.S. Doranda, District- Ranchi

¶9

Siddhu Kanhu Murmu University through its Vice Chancellor, Dumka, P.O., P.S. & District- Dumka

¶10

Registrar, Siddhu Kanhu Murmu University, Dumka, P.O., P.S. & DistrictDumka

¶11

Principal, Millat College, Parsa (Godda), P.O. K. Parsa, Via Basantroy, P.S. & District- Godda ... Respondents

¶12

CORAM: HON’BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR

¶13

---------

¶14

For the Appellant : Mrs. Abha Verma, Advocate For the Respondent-State : Mr. Chanchal Jain, A.C. to A.G. For the Respondent-University : Mr. Mithilesh Singh, Advocate

¶15

---------

¶16

09/Dated: 5th April, 2018 Oral Order Per D.N. Patel, A.C.J.:

¶17

1. This Letters Patent Appeal has been preferred by the original petitioner whose W.P.(S) No. 844 of 2014 was dismissed by the learned Single Judge vide judgment and order dated 6^th January, 2017, whereby, the claim of this appellant (original petitioner) for getting appointment on the post of Head Clerk was declined and the order passed by the respondent dated 22^nd October, 2013 which is at Annexure-13 to the memo of this Letters Patent Appeal was upheld. Reasons:-

¶18

2. Having heard counsels for both the sides and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, it appears that this appellant is the original petitioner who was appointed on the post of Clerk. It is prayed by this appellant that at the time of retirement, one letter, which is annexed at Annexure-1 to I.A. No. 2350 of 2018, was issued by Millat College, Parsa (Godda) to the effect

¶19

-2-

¶20

that this appellant has retired as a Head Clerk and, therefore, this appellant is claiming the post of Head Clerk and the salary of the post of Head Clerk. In fact, the said letter has no value in the eye of law because the issuing authority of the said letter i.e. Millat College, Parsa (Godda) has no power, jurisdiction and authority to appoint or promote this appellant as a Head Clerk nor there is any appointment with this appellant on this post.

¶21

3. Even otherwise also, such post like Head Clerk is not in existence at all, looking to the Hon'ble S.C. Agrawal Commission's Report. This aspect of the matter has been properly appreciated by the learned Single Judge while dismissing the writ petition being W.P. (S) No. 844 of 2014 vide judgment and order dated 6^th January, 2017 as the post of Head Clerk is not available in the said College and only 3 sanctioned posts of Clerk were in existence. There is no question, whatsoever arises, of the appointment of this appellant on the post of Head Clerk. Hence, there is no substance in this Letters Patent Appeal, the same is, hereby, dismissed.

¶22

4. In view of final disposal of the Letters Patent Appeal, I.A. No. 2350 of 2018 is also dismissed.

¶23

(D.N. Patel, A.C.J.)

¶24

(Rajesh Kumar, J.)

¶25

Ajay/

MD Mahiruddin v. the State of Jharkhand and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

MD Mahiruddin v. the State of Jharkhand and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Safiruddin Ansari Vs State of Jharkhand and Ors.

Thakur Das Mahato Vs the State of Jharkhand and Ors.

Shyam Sundar Sharma Vs the State of Jharkhand through Circle Officer and Anr.

Commissioner of Income Tax Vs M/S International Auto Ltd.

Commissioner of Income Tax Vs M/S Sidhi Vinayak Metcon Ltd.

Sarita Kumari Vs the State of Jharkhand and Ors.