Dismissed

Jai Prakash Roy v. State of Jharkhand And Ors.

Jharkhand HC4 Sept 2020WPC/6418/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition regarding employment for land oustees, the High Court directed the respondent authorities to consider the petitioner's representation within two months and decide the claim within three months in accordance with a prior judgment dated 2003.

What did the court decide?

The instant application was disposed of by directing the respondent authorities to receive a representation, consider it within three months, and pass a reasoned order.

Jai Prakash Roy Vs State of Jharkhand And… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Jharkhand HC (2020)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶3

W.P.(S) No.6418 of 2011

¶4

¶5

Jai Prakash Roy … … Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Jharkhand through the Chief Secretary, Govt. of Jharkhand, Ranchi.

¶8

The Principal Secretary-cum-Commissioner, Water Resources Department, Govt. of Jharkhand.

¶9

The Principal Secretary-cum-Commissioner, Human Resources Department, Govt. of Jharkhand.

¶10

The Chief Engineer, Water Resources Department, Ranchi.

¶11

The Superintending Engineer, Water Resources Department, Hazaribagh.

¶12

The Executive Engineer, Water Resources Department Konar Nahar Division, Bagodar.

¶13

The Director, Primary Education (HRD) Govt. of Jharkhand.

¶14

The District Superintendent of Education, Hazaribagh.

¶15

… … Respondents

¶16

¶17

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN

¶18

¶19

For the Petitioner : Mr. Praful Jojo, Advocate For the Res.State : Ms. Diksha Diwedi, A.C. to AAG-I

¶20

05/04.09.2020 Heard learned counsel for the parties through

¶21

V.C.

¶22

2. The instant application has been preferred by the petitioner for a direction upon the respondent authorities to provide employment to the petitioner on any Class-III post or on the post of Primary Teacher which is vacant because the petitioner is a land oustee and his land

¶23

¶24

has been acquired for construction of Konar Nahar Dam Project.

¶25

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he is entitled for any of the Class III post as per the letter no.1013 dated 16.04.2003.

¶26

4. Learned counsel for the respondent-State submits that the land was acquired by Water Resources Department and the said department cannot give an appointment to any land oustee on the post of primary teacher because the same is within the jurisdiction of other department, however the petitioner may approach the concerned department for his grievance with regard to his employment on any Class-III post.

¶27

5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after going through the materials available on record, It appears that the petitioner had earlier moved before this Court in W.P.(S) No.4842 of 2001, wherein this Court has directed as under:-

¶28

“ In the facts and circumstances, the case is remitted to the Secretary-cum-Commissioner, Water Resources Department, Government of Jharkhand before whom the petitioners will file a representation inclosing the copy of recommendation as referred in the writ petition and the court decision in support of their claim. The Secretary-cum-Commissioner, Water Resources Department, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi himself will decide the matter or may entrust any officer in the rank of superintending Engineer or above to decide the claim of one or other petitioner and will communicate the decision to such petitioners within three months from the date of receipt of such representation.”

¶29

¶30

6. Pursuant to the said order passed by this Court, a decision was taken which is annexed as Annexure-2 and it was decided that the case of the petitioner and others shall be considered on the basis of certain conditions. It further appears that the said order has been passed way back in the year 2003, but no action has been taken.

¶31

7. In this view of the matter, the petitioner is hereby directed to file a representation along with the order passed in W.P.(S) No.4842 of 2001 and also the letter dated 16.04.2003 passed by the respondents themselves, before the respondent no.2 within a period of two months from today. If any such representation is filed, the same shall be decided within a period of three months from the date of receipt of such representation in the light of order passed by this Court in W.P.(S) No.4842 of 2001 and also the decision taken by the respondents themselves which has been communicated to the petitioner vide letter no.462 dated 30.04.2003 and pass a reasoned and speaking order in accordance with law and shall be communicated to the petitioner.

¶32

8. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the instant application is hereby disposed of.

¶33

(Deepak Roshan, J.)

¶34

Fahim /-

Jai Prakash Roy v. State of Jharkhand And Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jai Prakash Roy v. 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pravin Kumar Vs State of Jharkhand And Ors.

Umesh Prasad Singh Vs Personnel and Adminis Reform

Poonam Devi Vs State of Jharkhand And Ors.

Ram Nath Lall Vs State of Jharkhand And Ors.

Deepak Sao Vs State of Jharkhand And Ors.

Madan Ravidas Vs State of Jharkhand And Ors.