IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cont. Case(Civil) No. 500 of 2009
Dr. Sheo Prasanna Singh ... ... Petitioner
Versus
State of Jharkhand & Others ... ... Respondents
------
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE D.N. PATEL
——
For the Petitioner: M/s Ram Kishore Prasad
For the Respondent: J.C. to Sr. S.C.I
-----
11/Dated 29th June, 2011
1. This is a disposed of matter, which has come under the heading “for
orders” for correction of certain typographical mistakes, occurring in the
order dated 9th May, 2011.
2. It appears that in the 2nd line of paragraph no.2 of the order dated 9th
May, 2011, in place of “W.P.(S) No. 3777 of 2008, inadvertently it has
been typed as “W.P.(S) No. 3776 of 2008”.
3. Further, in the order dated 9th May, 2011, the quoted portion be
deleted and in its place, the same should be read as under:
“5. In view of these facts, I hereby quash and set aside the order
dated 5th March, 2003, which is at Annexure-8, which is based upon
notification dated 3rd March, 2003 bearing State Government Notification
No. 1/B2-05/2002 HRD/44 passed by the concerned respondent
authorities mainly on the ground of violation of principles of natural justice.
Respondents will fix the pay of the petitioner after giving opportunity of
being heard. For the salary of the intervening period, the petitioner shall
make necessary representation to the concerned respondent authorities,
who will decide the same, looking to the work done by the petitioner.”
4. Likewise, paragraph nos. 3 and 4 of the order dated 9th May, 2011
should be read in the light of the counter affidavit, filed in Cont. Case
(Civil) No. 390 of 2009, treating the same to be part and parcel of the
present contempt application.
5. Further, in paragraph no. 5 of the order dated 9th May, 2011, in the
fourth line, ‘order dated 30th September, 2009’ should be read as ‘3rd
February, 2011’.
6. In the third line of paragraph No. 6 of the order dated 9th May, 2011,
the year ‘1978’ should be read as ‘1976’ and further paragraph no. 7 of the
-2-
order dated 9th May, 2011 should be deleted and it will be replaced and
read as under :
“As per government officials, appointment was de-hors the law for
the reasons stated in the Annexure A to the counter affidavit filed by
respondent no. 2”.
7. The order dated 9th May, 2011, passed in Cont. Case (Civil) No. 500
of 2009 stands modified to the extent, indicated above. This order will be
treated as part and parcel of the order dated 9th May, 2011.
(D.N. Patel, J.)
s.m.