Jharkhand High Court
Kamdeo Bhaiya vs The State Of Jharkhand on 26 September, 2024
Author: Ambuj Nath
Bench: Ambuj Nath
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W.P. (S) No. 3501 of 2016
Kamdeo Bhaiya, S/o Kashi Nath Bhaiya, R/o Village- Jama,
P.O. & P.S.- Madhupur, District- Deoghar, Jharkhand
... ... Petitioner(s)
- Versus -
1. The State of Jharkhand
2. The Principal Secretary, Department of Health, Medical
Education and Family Welfare, Government of Jharkhand,
Ranchi, officiating from Project Bhawan, Post Dhurwa, Police
Station Dhurwa, District Ranchi
3. The Civil Surgeon-cum-Chief Medical Officer, Deoghar
officiating from Deoghar, Post Deoghar, Police Station Deoghar,
District Deoghar.
... ... Respondent(s)
------
CORAM: - HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMBUJ NATH
-----
For the Petitioners : M/s. Ritu Kumar, Advocate
For the Resp-State : M/s. Sunita Kumari, AC to Sr. S.C.II
---
16/26.09.2024 Heard the parties.
The petitioner has filed this writ petition for quashing
of order contained in Memo No. 778 (23) dated 16.04.2016
(Annexure-8) passed by the respondent no. 2 The Principal
Secretary, Department of Health, Medical Education and Family
Welfare, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi, whereby and wherein
the claim of the petitioner for reinstating him in service was
dismissed.
The petitioner has further prayed for quashing of order
contained in Memo No. 1253 dated 09.05.2006 (Annexure-5) under
the signature of respondent no. 3 The Civil Surgeon-cum-Chief
Medical Officer, Deoghar, whereby and wherein the service of the
petitioner was terminated without issuing any show cause and
initiating departmental proceeding. The petitioner was appointed as
health guide in pursuance of advertisement issued in the month of
December 1987 on the post of health guide. The petitioner
alongwith others was appointed as health guide by Civil Surgeon
Cum- Chief Medical Officer, Deoghar vide Memo No. 1875 dated
26.12.1987, it appears that subsequently all the persons who were
appointed in pursuance to the advertisement were terminated on the
ground that several illegalities were committed.
The petitioner alongwith some of the persons who were
dismissed had moved the Patna High Court and the Hon'ble Single
Judge in C.W.J.C. No. 6575 of 2009 and in the analogous cases held
that the termination of those persons were violative of Principles of
Natural justice and directed the respondents to reinstate them in
service. There was specific direction of the learned Single Judge of
Patna High Court to reinstate the person who were appointed in
terms of the aforesaid advertisement,
The petitioner filed a writ petition being W.P.(S) No.
3238 of 2006 and learned single judge of this court vide order dated
22.12.2014 directed the respondents to consider the case of the
petitioner, as his case was squarely covered by the judgment of
Patna High Court and the same benefit may be extended to him.
Learned counsel for the respondent submitted that by
reasoned order, the claim of the petitioner has been rejected by the
respondents as his employment was illegal. Hon'ble Single Judge in
W.P.(S) No. 3238 of 2006 has specifically directed the respondents
to consider the case of the petitioner in the light of the direction
passed by the Hon'ble Patna High Court and grant him the same
benefit. The Hon'ble Patna High Court in C.W.J.C. No. 6575 of
2009 and in all the analogous cases had given a specific direction to
reinstate the employees who were dismissed from service and no
option was given to the respondents to consider their case afresh
and pass a reasonable order.
The respondents have not preferred any appeal against
order of the Patna High Court, or against the order of the learned
Single Judge of this High Court. As such, the direction given under
the aforesaid case is binding on the respondents.
In view of the specific directions that the persons were
to be reinstated and the respondents had no choice to pass order but
to pass an order reinstating them in service.
This writ petition is allowed.
The impugned memo dismissing the petitioner from
service is set aside.
The respondents are directed to reinstate the petitioner
into service within four weeks from the date of receipt of this order.
Pending I.A., if any, also stands disposed of.
(Ambuj Nath, J.)
Saurabh
Uploaded
