Disposed

Ram Mohan Mehta v. State of Jharkhand And Ors.

Jharkhand HC22 Feb 2022WPC/5758/2007

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court of Jharkhand disposed of a writ petition seeking reinstatement. Instead of adjudicating merits, the Court granted liberty to file a detailed representation and directed competent authorities to decide the matter after affording an opportunity of hearing.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to file detailed representation; respondents directed to fix hearing date and pass reasoned order after considering representation.

Ram Mohan Mehta Vs State of Jharkhand And Ors. — Service and Employment | Jharkhand HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶3

W. P. (S) No. 5758 of 2007

¶4

Ram Mohan Mehta, Son of Late Kishori Lal, Resident of Namkom Pratap Chowk, Krishnapuri Colony, Post-Namkom, P.S. Namkom, District-Ranchi. … … Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

State of Jharkhand

¶7

Director, Bhartiya Nritya Kala Mandir, Project Building, Sanskrit Kala, Dhurwa, Post Dhurwa, P.S. Dhurwa, District-Ranchi.

¶8

Administrative Officer, Bhartiya Nritya Kala Mandir, Project Building, Sanskrit Kala, Dhurwa, Post Dhurwa, P.S. Dhurwa, District-Ranchi.

¶9

State of Jharkhand represented by the Secretary, Department of Education, Government of Jharkhand, having his office at Project Building, Dhurwa, Post-Dhurwa, P.S. Dhurwa, District: Ranchi.

¶10

… … Respondents

¶11

¶12

CORAM: HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY

¶13

¶14

Through Video Conferencing

¶15

09/22.02.2022

¶16

1. Heard Mr. Purnendu Sharan, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner.

¶17

2. Heard Ms. Shalini Shahdeo, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent(s).

¶18

3. The present writ petition has been filed seeking a direction upon the respondents to reinstate the petitioner in the post of “Typistcum-Clerk” and for consequential reliefs and an interlocutory application has been filed being I.A. No. 2570/2012, challenging the dismissal order dated 08.12.1998.

¶19

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was appointed on 07.04.1971 on the post of typist-cum-clerk under respondent Nos.-2, and the Respondent no.3 had filed a criminal case against the petitioner being G.R. Case No. 1732/1986 and the petitioner was convicted for offence under Section 409 of the Indian Penal Code vide judgment dated 07.12.1998. On account of his conviction, the petitioner was dismissed from service vide order dated 08.12.1998. He further submits that the petitioner was acquitted vide order dated 28.02.2003 passed in Cr. Appeal No. 158/1998 and upon his acquittal, the petitioner filed repeated representations before the

¶20

¶21

Respondent No.-2 including representation dated 10.12.2004 and ultimately legal notice dated 01.01.2005 was also issued by the Advocate of the petitioner. The learned counsel further submits that having no response, a letter was also issued to the Chief Secretary of the State of Jharkhand on 31.03.2005 asking the said authority to direct the Respondent No.-2 to reinstate him in the post of typist-cumclerk. The learned counsel submits that in spite of all efforts, no steps were taken by the respondents to reinstate the petitioner and the petitioner is not only entitled to reinstatement, but also to consequential reliefs. 5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents, on the other hand, has submitted that it appears that the matter is pending before the Respondent Nos.-2 and the Respondent No.-4 may also have a role in the matter and in such circumstances, instead of entering into the merits of the case, appropriate order be passed directing the Respondent Nos. 2 and 4 to take appropriate decision in the matter, upon filing of a detailed representation.

¶22

6. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of this case and it appears that the petitioner was convicted on 07.12.1998 and was acquitted in appeal on 28.02.2003 and on account of conviction, he was dismissed from the service on 08.12.1998. However, after his acquittal, the petitioner had made various representations before the respondent No.-2 and also brought the matter to the notice of the Chief Secretary, State of Jharkhand, but neither any action has been taken nor any order has been passed.

¶23

7. Accordingly, the present writ petition is disposed of with a liberty to the petitioner to file a detailed representation along with all essential documents before the respondent Nos. 2 and 4 within a period of one month from today and upon receipt of the representation, the respondent Nos. 2 and 4, whosoever be the competent authority for the purpose, is directed to fix a date of hearing and give an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and pass a reasoned order in accordance with law. The reasoned order should be passed within a period of three months from the date of receipt of the

¶24

¶25

representation filed by the petitioner and be communicated to the petitioner at his e-mail id as well as through speed post which may be mentioned by the petitioner in his representation.

¶26

8. This writ petition is disposed of with the aforesaid observation and direction. It is made clear that this Court has not entered into the merits or otherwise regarding the claim of reinstatement of the petitioner and also consequential reliefs.

¶27

9. Interim order, if any, stands vacated.

¶28

10. Pending interlocutory application is also disposed .

¶29

(Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.)

¶30

Mukul

Ram Mohan Mehta v. State of Jharkhand And Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ram Mohan Mehta 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

Dr Shyam Nandan Singh Vs the State of Jharkhand

Range Forest Officers Association through Its General Secretary Anil Kumar Singh Vs the State of Jharkhand and Ors.

Somay Baskey Vs State of Jharkhand

Bhatu Ram Vs State of Jharkhand And Ors.

Atwa Gope Alias Eto Gope Vs Collectariate

Md Sallauddin Saba And Ors. Vs Health