Jharkhand High Court
Anita Kumari vs The State Of Jharkhand on 3 November, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
WP(S) No. 417 of 2017
------
Anita Kumari.... Petitioner.
Versus
1. The State of Jharkhand
2. The Principal District and Sessions Judge, Civil Court, Simdega.
3. The Judge-in-Charge-cum-Registrar, Civil Court, Simdega.
4. The Registrar General, Jharkhand High Court, Ranchi.
Respondents.
-----
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANDA SEN.
------
For the petitioner: M/s Anil Kr. Ganjhu and Prinyanka Kumari, Advocates.
For the respondent(s): Mr. Gautam Kumar Singh, AC to GP-IV.
-----
11/03.11.2022: In this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the orders as
contained in Letter No. 11/2016 dated 14.1.2016 and Letter No. 1344 of 2016
dated 21.12.2016 (Annexure-7 Series) issued by the Judge Incharge and the
Principal District and Sessions Judge, Simdega, respectively. Prayer has been
made to direct the respondent to reinstate the petitioner and accept her joining
and allow her to work.
2. Admittedly, the petitioner was appointed as a peon vide Letter No.
736 dated 19.8.2015 by the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Simdega. She
joined on 10.9.2015, but she was stopped from performing her work on the ground
that she has obtained her degree from Hindi Vidyapith, Deoghar and as by virtue
of a decision of the State of Jharkhand, the degrees issued by Hindi Vidyapith,
Deoghar was held to be invalid. On the ground of an invalid degree the petitioner
was stopped from performing her duty.
3. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid action of the respondent, the
petitioner has approached this Court.
4. After going though the documents, annexed to this writ petition, I find
that the ground taken for not taking work from the petitioner is that the petitioner
has obtained the degree from Hindi Vidyapith, Deoghar and as per the
Government's decision, the said degree is not valid. Thus the appointment of the
petitioner was held to be bad.
5. This issue is not res integra. In writ petition being WPS No. 3115 of
2015 and its analogous cases, the Division Bench of this Court vide judgment
dated 10.5.2022 in paragraph 23 has held that the degrees issued till 26.2.2015
by the Hindi Vidyapith, Deoghar are valid.
6. Admittedly, the petitioner has obtained her degree in the year 2011.
Thus the degree of the petitioner issued by Hindi Vidyapith, Deoghar in view of the
judgment of this Court is a valid degree.
7. Stopping the petitioner from performing her duty on the ground of
validity of the degree now is not proper. Thus, this writ petition stands allowed.
8. Consequently, I direct the petitioner to join her service within a week,
which should be accepted by the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Simdega.
9. It will be open to the petitioner to file representation claiming her back
wages, which should be considered by the respondent authority, as per law.
10. It is also made clear that the period which the petitioner was out of
service will not be treated to be a break in service for any purpose.
11. Let this order be communicated to the Principal District and Sessions
Judge, Simdega through FAX at the earliest.
Anu/-CP2. (ANANDA SEN, J.)
