Second appeal by a plaintiff whose suit for declaration that his termination as Camp Chowkidar was illegal and for reappointment was reversed on first appeal. Court held the suit maintainable but upheld reversal since the appointment was temporary against no sanctioned post; appeal dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI S. A. No. 57 of 1995(R)
Amarendra Kumar Sinha
.... …. Appellant
Versus
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY
For the Appellant : Mr. B.V. Kumar, Advocate For the Respondents : Ms. Varsha Ramsisaria, AC to G.P.-V
Oral Order
18 / Dated : 25.06.2024
1
his service?
Issue No. IV — To what relief or reliefs is the plaintiff entitled to?
Firstly, from Ext. 4/E it would be evident that he had applied for appointment in any of the post of work charge establishment, on the recommendation of Junior Engineer he was appointed for three months. Again on 18.01.1980 he prayed for extension of his employment which was accordingly, extended till March, 1980. Secondly, plaintiff was never appointed, rather was kept in work charge establishment for efficient execution of survey work, and was not against a sanctioned post. His appointment or re-appointment depended upon existence of work of Chowkidar as a casual labour.
2
behalf of the State, it was not dismissed on the ground of maintainability alone but also because the Plaintiff had not been appointed against a sanctioned post and the appointment was on purely temporarily post on which he had no right to continue. Having considered the substantial question of law as answered accordingly, the suit was maintainable. However, learned First Appellate Court has assigned specific and sufficient reason for setting aside the judgment and decree passed by learned Trial Court. Furthermore, at this stage the prayer has itself become infructuous with passage of time as it has been made for declaration of removal to be illegal, and also for a declaration that the plaintiff was employee of the defendant.
Second Appeal stand dismissed.
(Gautam Kumar Choudhary, J.)
AKT/Satendra
3
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the First Appellate Court erred in reopening the maintainability question at the appellate stage when it had been confirmed earlier.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Amarendra Kumar Sinha
The State of Bihar through the Deputy Commissioner, Hazaribagh
Executive Engineer, Master Plan, Investigation, Irrigation Division, Chatra
Gautam Kumar Choudhary
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
