Balwant Sahay vs State Of Jharkhand & Anr on 22 March, 2013

[Cites 0, Cited by 9]

Jharkhand High Court

Balwant Sahay vs State Of Jharkhand & Anr on 22 March, 2013

Bench: D.N. Patel

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI      
                 Cont. Case (Civil) No. 346 of 2008
                              with
                Cont. Case (Civil) No. 317 of 2008
Balwant Sahay                  ......Petitioner [Cont. Case (Civil) No. 346 of 2008]
Arun Sinha & Ors.         ....... Petitioners [Cont. Case (Civil) No. 317 of 2008]
                              Versus
State of Jharkhand & others  ....... Opposite Parties (in both cases)
                      
CORAM:  HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D.N. PATEL  
 For the Petitioner(s): Mr. M.M Pan, [In Cont. Case (Civil) No. 346 of 2008]
                           : Dr. S.K. Pandey [In Cont. Case (Civil) No. 317 of 2008]
 For the Respondents: J.C. to S.C.II  [In Cont. Case (Civil) No. 346 of 2008]
                             J.C. to Sr. S.C.I [In Cont. Case (Civil) No. 317 of 2008] 
                       
 15/Dated: 22  nd  March, 2013

1. Counsel appearing for the applicants submitted that despite the orders passed by this Court in the earlier writ petitions, the same have not been complied with. Thereafter, the L.P.A. preferred by the State has also been dismissed by the Division Bench of this Court vide order dated 6 th November, 2012. Despite this dismissal order no calculation for the amount legally payable to the applicants has been made by the State lethargic officers. Thereafter S.L.P. preferred by the State has also been dismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court vide order dated 8 th March, 2013 and no step has been taken even after 8th March, 2013.

2. Counsel for the opposite partyState is seeking three months time to comply with the orders.

3. It appears from the aforesaid arguments of the counsel for the applicants that much earlier the orders were passed in the respective writ petitions and therefore, the opposite parties could have calculated the amount legally payable to the applicants. Thereafter, after dismissal of LPA and S.L.P. immediately at least the calculation of legally payable amount should have been get ready.

4. It is submitted by the counsel for the opposite partyState that on 21st March, 2013 i.e. on yesterday, a decision has been taken in compliance with the orders, passed by this Court and a resolution has been passed. It is submitted by the counsel for the applicants that the District Superintendent of Eduction, Ranchi, who has been referred in the resolution dated 21st March, 2013, has nothing to do with the matter. The applicants are concerned with the District, Giridih and in fact, the opposite party no. 2 has to pass the order. Such a simple aspect of the matter has 2. not be appreciated by the opposite party no. 2.

5. I therefore, direct the Chief Secretary, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi to stop the salary of the opposite party no. 2, who is Director, Primary Education, Human Resources Development Department, State of Jharkhand, Ranchi, if the legally payable amount is not paid to the applicants within a period of thirty days from today. If the legally payable amount is paid within the aforesaid period, there is no need to stop the salary of the opposite party no. 2.

6. Registry is directed to communicate this order to the Chief Secretary, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi.

7. The matter is adjourned on 12th April, 2013.

(D.N. Patel, J) VK/

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Jharkhand High Court