Jharkhand High Court
Ram Mohan Mehta vs State Of Jharkhand on 22 February, 2022
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W. P. (S) No. 5758 of 2007
Ram Mohan Mehta, Son of Late Kishori Lal, Resident of Namkom
Pratap Chowk, Krishnapuri Colony, Post-Namkom, P.S. Namkom,
District-Ranchi. ... ... Petitioner
Versus
1. State of Jharkhand
2. Director, Bhartiya Nritya Kala Mandir, Project Building, Sanskrit
Kala, Dhurwa, Post Dhurwa, P.S. Dhurwa, District-Ranchi.
3. Administrative Officer, Bhartiya Nritya Kala Mandir, Project
Building, Sanskrit Kala, Dhurwa, Post Dhurwa, P.S. Dhurwa,
District-Ranchi.
4. State of Jharkhand represented by the Secretary, Department of
Education, Government of Jharkhand, having his office at Project
Building, Dhurwa, Post-Dhurwa, P.S. Dhurwa, District: Ranchi.
... ... Respondents
---
CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY
---
Through Video Conferencing
09/22.02.2022
1. Heard Mr. Purnendu Sharan, learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the petitioner.
2. Heard Ms. Shalini Shahdeo, learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the respondent(s).
3. The present writ petition has been filed seeking a direction
upon the respondents to reinstate the petitioner in the post of "Typist-
cum-Clerk" and for consequential reliefs and an interlocutory
application has been filed being I.A. No. 2570/2012, challenging the
dismissal order dated 08.12.1998.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner
was appointed on 07.04.1971 on the post of typist-cum-clerk under
respondent Nos.-2, and the Respondent no.3 had filed a criminal case
against the petitioner being G.R. Case No. 1732/1986 and the
petitioner was convicted for offence under Section 409 of the Indian
Penal Code vide judgment dated 07.12.1998. On account of his
conviction, the petitioner was dismissed from service vide order dated
08.12.1998. He further submits that the petitioner was acquitted vide
order dated 28.02.2003 passed in Cr. Appeal No. 158/1998 and upon
his acquittal, the petitioner filed repeated representations before the
Respondent No.-2 including representation dated 10.12.2004 and
ultimately legal notice dated 01.01.2005 was also issued by the
Advocate of the petitioner. The learned counsel further submits that
having no response, a letter was also issued to the Chief Secretary of
the State of Jharkhand on 31.03.2005 asking the said authority to
direct the Respondent No.-2 to reinstate him in the post of typist-cum-
clerk. The learned counsel submits that in spite of all efforts, no steps
were taken by the respondents to reinstate the petitioner and the
petitioner is not only entitled to reinstatement, but also to
consequential reliefs.
5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents, on the
other hand, has submitted that it appears that the matter is pending
before the Respondent Nos.-2 and the Respondent No.-4 may also
have a role in the matter and in such circumstances, instead of entering
into the merits of the case, appropriate order be passed directing the
Respondent Nos. 2 and 4 to take appropriate decision in the matter,
upon filing of a detailed representation.
6. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and
considering the facts and circumstances of this case and it appears that
the petitioner was convicted on 07.12.1998 and was acquitted in
appeal on 28.02.2003 and on account of conviction, he was dismissed
from the service on 08.12.1998. However, after his acquittal, the
petitioner had made various representations before the respondent
No.-2 and also brought the matter to the notice of the Chief Secretary,
State of Jharkhand, but neither any action has been taken nor any
order has been passed.
7. Accordingly, the present writ petition is disposed of with a
liberty to the petitioner to file a detailed representation along with all
essential documents before the respondent Nos. 2 and 4 within a
period of one month from today and upon receipt of the
representation, the respondent Nos. 2 and 4, whosoever be the
competent authority for the purpose, is directed to fix a date of hearing
and give an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and pass a
reasoned order in accordance with law. The reasoned order should be
passed within a period of three months from the date of receipt of the
representation filed by the petitioner and be communicated to the
petitioner at his e-mail id as well as through speed post which may be
mentioned by the petitioner in his representation.
8. This writ petition is disposed of with the aforesaid observation
and direction. It is made clear that this Court has not entered into the
merits or otherwise regarding the claim of reinstatement of the
petitioner and also consequential reliefs.
9. Interim order, if any, stands vacated.
10. Pending interlocutory application is also disposed .
(Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.)
Mukul
