Jharkhand High Court
The State Of Jharkhand Through The ... vs Shasticharan Mahto on 26 June, 2018
Author: Aparesh Kumar Singh
Bench: Aparesh Kumar Singh, Ratnaker Bhengra
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
L.P.A. No. 348 of 2017
----
1. The State of Jharkhand through the Principal Chief Conservator of Forest, Jharkhand
2. The Addl. Principal Chief Conservator of Forest, Wild Life Circle, Ranchi --- ---- Appellants Versus
1. Shasticharan Mahto
2. Jagat Singh
3. Rabi Singh
4. Bisan Singh
5. Tarun Singh
6. Mirja Shamim Akhtar Beg
7. Maheshwar Singh
8. Rabindra Kumar Singh
9. Manjit Sagar
10. Girdhari Oraon
11. Rina Singh
12. The Secretary, Department of Forest & Environment, Govt. of Jharkhand
13. The Deputy Commissioner, East Singhbhum, Jamshedpur
14. The Conservator of Forest, Jamshedpur Division, East Singhbhum
15. The Conservator of Forest, Wild Life Circle, Ranchi
16. The Divisional Forest Officer, Wild Life Division, Ranchi
17. The Divisional Forest Officer, Dalma Wild Life Division, Ranchi
18. The Range Forest Officer, Wild Life Division, Ranchi
19. The Range Forest Officer, Dalma Wild Life Sanctuary, Jamshedpur
--- --- Respondents CORAM: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ratnaker Bhengra For the Appellants: M/s Anil Kr. Sinha, Sr. Advocate, Abhishek Sinha, Raunak Sahay, Advocates
---
08/ 26.06.2018 This matter has been assigned to this Bench by order of Hon'ble the Acting Chief Justice in view of order of recusal passed by the Coordinate Bench.
2. Learned Senior counsel for the appellants submits that the impugned order herein is similar to that under challenge in LPA No. 305/2017 and 346/2017. As a matter of fact, about eight writ petitions were decided in similar fashion following the order passed in one of the writ petition WPS No. 2404/2010 by the Learned Single Judge. He further submits that vide judgment dated 18.10.2016 passed in WPS No. 2404/2010, Learned Single Judge in similar circumstances directed the Respondent Commissioner cum Secretary, Department of Forest and Environment and Principal Chief Conservator of Forest, Jharkhand to initiate the process of regularization of daily wage employees working in the department in terms of Notification dated 13.02.2015 and complete the process within six months. Order also indicated that it would not be confined only to the employees of that writ petition, rather would cover all such employees who were working 2 for more than ten years under the Department of Forest and Environment. Following the ratio laid down therein, several writ petitions including the present one were disposed of by separate orders. State preferred LPA No. 305/2017 against the judgment passed in WPS No. 2404/2010. The Coordinate Learned Division Bench of this Court by order dated 22.11.2017 passed in LPA No. 305/2017, has been pleased to stay the proceedings in Contempt Case (Civil) No. 387/2017 till the next date of hearing, while issuing notices on the Respondents. Similarly, LPA No. 346/2017 was preferred against the judgment dated 20.01.2017 passed in WPS No. 2551/2015 on behalf of the appellant State of Jharkhand being aggrieved by the impugned directions to consider regularization of such daily wagers in the Forest Department. The Coordinate Learned Division Bench of this Court vide order dated 04.12.2017 passed in LPA No. 346/2017, has been pleased to condone the delay of 140 days while also granting stay on the operation of the impugned judgment. That appeal has been admitted for hearing. Learned senior counsel submits that the writ petitioners are also pursuing contempt proceedings. Therefore, the impugned order may be stayed, otherwise irreparable injury may be caused.
3. Present appeal suffers from a delay of 185 days, for condonation of which, I.A. No. 6954/2017 has been filed. Prayer for stay of the impugned order has also been made through I.A. No. 6955/2017.
4. Issue notice on Respondent Nos. 1 to 11 in limitation Matter (I.A. No. 6954/2017) and in the stay petition (I.A. No. 6955/2017) as also in the main Memo of Appeal, for which requisites under Registered cover with A/D be filed within one week, failing which this appeal shall stand dismissed without further reference to the Bench. Respondent Nos. 12 to 19 who were some of the official Respondents in the writ petition have been arrayed as Proforma Respondents.
5. Learned counsel for the appellants shall serve copy of the entire pleadings in the office of Learned Advocate General by Friday. On filing of the receipt of service of notice, let the name of learned counsel for the State be reflected in the cause list thereafter.
6. In the meantime, operation of the impugned order dated 11.11.2016 passed in WPS No. 1611/2013 shall remain stayed.
(Aparesh Kumar Singh, J) (Ratnaker Bhengra, J) Ranjeet/