Allowed

Md Rafiq Ahmad v. Personnel And Adminis Reform

Jharkhand HC10 Jul 2024WPC/577/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Peons recruited for District Level Government Department posts were posted instead in the District Rural Development Agency, Sahebganj. Following a Division Bench ruling, the Court held their posting to DRDA illegal and quashed the impugned memo and letter rejecting their transfer representations.

What did the court decide?

Impugned Memo No.151 dated 19.03.2016 and Letter No.1043 dated 24.02.2016 quashed; writ petitions allowed.

Md Rafiq Ahmad Vs Personnel And Adminis Reform — Service and Employment | Jharkhand HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

W.P.(S) No. 577 of 2017

¶3

-------

¶4

Md. Rafiq Ahmad

¶5

…... …. Petitioner(s)

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Jharkhand through the Secretary, Personnel A.R and Rajbhasha Deptt., Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, Ranchi.

¶8

The Secretary, Rural Development Department, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi

¶9

The Divisional Commissioner, Dumka Division, Dumka.

¶10

The Deputy Commissioner, Sahebganj.

¶11

The Managing Director, District Rural Development Authority (D.R.D.A), Sahebganj.

¶12

The Establishment Deputy Collector, Sahebganj.

¶13

Smt. Lushiya Murmu

¶14

Md. Shakil Ahmad

¶15

Sri Parmanand Pal

¶16

.…. …. Respondent(s)

¶17

With

¶18

W.P.(S) No. 773 of 2017

¶19

-------

¶20

Pawan Kumar …... …. Petitioner(s)

¶21

Versus

¶22

The State of Jharkhand through the Secretary, Personnel A.R. and Rajbhasha Deptt., Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, Ranchi.

¶23

The Secretary, Rural Development Department, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi

¶24

The Divisional Commissioner, Dumka Division, Dumka.

¶25

The Deputy Commissioner, Sahebganj.

¶26

The Managing Director, District Rural Development Authority (D.R.D.A), Sahebganj.

¶27

The Establishment Deputy Collector (E.D.C.), Sahebganj.

¶28

Smt. Lushiya Murmu

¶29

Md. Sakil Ahmad

¶30

Sri Parmanand Pal

¶31

.…. …. Respondent(s)

¶32

¶33

CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AMBUJ NATH

¶34

-------For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ramadhar Pd. Srivastav, Advocate Mr. Lalit Kr. Singh, Advocate Mr. Ashit Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent : Mr. Devesh Krishna, S.C (Mines)-III Mr. Mohammad Asghar, A.C to Sr.S.C.-II --------

¶35

16/ Dated 10.07.2024

¶36

Heard the parties.

¶37

Both these writ applications arise out of the same cause of action and accordingly, both these writ applications are being disposed of by a common order.

¶38

The petitioner Md. Rafiq Ahmad in W.P.(S) No.577/2017 and the petitioner Pawan Kumar in W.P.(S) No.773/2017 have filed these writ applications for quashing of Memo No. 151 dated 19.03.2016 and Letter

¶39

-2-

¶40

No.1043 dated 24.02.2016, whereby and wherein, the representations filed by the petitioners for transferring them from District Rural Development Agency (in short as ‘D.R.D.A.’), Sahebganj to any office of District Level Government Department Establishment as per the relevant terms of appointment of the petitioners, as similarly situated candidates have been appointed in the District Level Government Department.

¶41

The case of the petitioners is that in pursuance to the advertisement, petitioners applied for appointment on the posts of peons in the Department of Collectorate, Sahebganj and other Government departments. They had participated in the recruitment process and they were declared to be successful. It is the further case of the petitioners that instead of being posted in the District Level Government Department, they were posted in the District Rural Development Agency, Sahebganj. According to the petitioners, the service conditions of a peon in District Level Government Department and that of District Rural Development Agency are not the same. The peons posted in the District Level Government Department are entitled for better financial upgradation and also the pensionary benefits, which is not available to the peons appointed in the District Rural Development Agency ( in short as ‘D.R.D.A.’).

¶42

Reliance has been placed upon the decision of this Court passed in L.P.A. No. 441/2016 passed by the Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court dated 28.06.2017, where the Hon’ble Division Bench has held that where the appellants were appointed subject to the recruitment process for the appointment in the Establishment of District Level Government Department, they cannot be transferred or posted in the District Rural Development Agency.

¶43

The order passed in the aforesaid L.P.As, has laid this issue to rest. 6. Mr. Devesh Krishna, learned counsel for the respondents has submitted that D.R.D.A is an agency and there is no provision for adjustment in any government organization.

¶44

As the petitioners were appointed in pursuance to the recruitment process for appointment in District Level Government Department, their posting for appointment in District Rural Development Agency is grossly illegal and the contention of the petitioners that they will be deprived of from the financial upgradation and pensionary benefits has much force in it.

¶45

-3-

¶46

In view of the aforesaid facts, both these writ applications are allowed. The impugned Memo and letter are quashed.

¶47

Pending I.A. if any also stands disposed of.

¶48

(Ambuj Nath, J.)

¶49

BS/

Md Rafiq Ahmad v. Personnel And Adminis Reform

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Md Rafiq Ahmad v. Personnel And Adminis Reform

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

Sita Ram Choudhary Vs the State of Jharkhand through the Secretary Pr Secretary Agriculture Animal Husbandry Deptt

Awadhesh Kumar Rana Vs the State of Jharkhand

Sunil Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand

Dr Malati Majhi Vs the Registrar National Institute of Technology

Jai Jyoti Samanta Vs Personnel And Adminis Reform

Ratnesh Kumar Chaturvedi Vs Co. Operative