Dismissed

Sanskrit Kumar v. State of Jharkhand through Director General of Police

Jharkhand HC23 Jan 2023WPC/292/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged his oral termination from Constable post and sought reinstatement. The Court held that existence of appointment was seriously disputed on facts. Being a factual dispute, matter is dismissed and party advised to approach Civil Court.

What did the court decide?

Petition dismissed; party advised to approach Civil Court on account of disputed question of fact.

Sanskrit Kumar Vs State of Jharkhand through… — Service and Employment | Jharkhand HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(S) No. 292 of 2020

¶2

----

¶3

Sanskrit Kumar, Son of Late Saryug Paswan, resident of Loyabad Coke Plant, P.O-Bansjora, P.S.-Putki, District-Dhanbad, Jharkhand … Petitioner

¶4

-versus- State of Jharkhand through Director General of Police, Jharkhand Police Headquarter, Dhurwa, Ranchi.

¶5

… Respondent

¶6

---CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANDA SEN

¶7

---For the Petitioner : Mr. Prem Mardi, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Jayant Franklin Toppo, G.A-V Mr. Amrit Raj Kisku, A.C to G.A.-V ----

¶8

06/ 23.01.2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents.

¶9

2. Petitioner, in this writ petition, has prayed for cancelling the termination of the petitioner from the post of Constable. Further prayer has been made to allow him to rejoin his service.

¶10

3. Petitioner claims that he was appointed as Constable in Jharkhand Police pursuant to advertisement No. 1/10. He qualified in written examination and got selected after completing all the formalities. He was issued a certificate, which has been brought on record as Annexure 1 to this writ petition. It suggests that he was appointed in the Police Force and he was allotted Personnel No.1692. It is the case of the petitioner that suddenly he was orally terminated for which he has approached this Court by filing this writ petition. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner should not have been orally terminated without following the procedure of law. Thus, he needs to be reinstated in service.

¶11

4. A counter affidavit has been filed by the State-respondents, wherein they have specifically taken a plea that this petitioner was never appointed in the police force, rather this petitioner had fled from the ground after medical test. Thereafter he neither appeared before any Officer nor approached for recruitment. In the supplementary counter affidavit, the respondents have denied existence of Annexure 1 on the ground that neither there is any seal of authority nor does it contained signature of any authority. 5. The petitioner in this writ petition has challenged his oral termination order. His claim is that he was appointed after following due process of law. This fact has been seriously disputed and denied by the

¶12

-: 2 :-

¶13

respondents. Annexure 1 is a certificate, which mentions that the petitioner is in the police force bearing personnel No.1692. This document is neither signed by any authority nor there is any seal of any authority. Further, in the supplementary counter affidavit, existence of this document is denied by the respondents.

¶14

6. Thus, there is serious disputed question of fact, which cannot be decided in this writ petition. Dispute is with regard to appointment of this petitioner. It is denied by the respondents. Thus, no relief can be granted to the petitioner in this writ petition. Petitioner, if so advised, may approach the Civil Court, considering the disputed question of facts involved in this writ petition.

¶15

7. This writ petition is, thus, dismissed.

¶16

Kumar/S.K/Cp-02

¶17

(Ananda Sen, J.)

Sanskrit Kumar v. State of Jharkhand through Director General of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sanskrit Kumar v. State of Jharkhand through Director General of Police

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

Anil Kumar Das Vs the State of Jharkhand through the Chief Secretary

Rajmatia Devi Vs Central Coalfields Limited through Its Chairman Cum Managing Director

Duryodhan Mahto Vs the State of Jharkhand

Vijay Marandi Vs the State of Jharkhand

Rana Uday Pratap Singh Vs Jharkhand Mineral Area Development Authority Represented through Its Managing Director

Rajni Kumari Vs State of Jharkhand