High Court Jharkhand High Court

Dr.Sheo Prasanna Singh vs State Of Jharkhand & Ors on 18 February, 2009

Jharkhand High Court
Dr.Sheo Prasanna Singh vs State Of Jharkhand & Ors on 18 February, 2009
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

               W.P. (S) No. 3777 of 2008

Dr. Sheo Prasanna Singh                     ...         Petitioner
                    Versus
The State of Jharkhand & Others             ...         Respondents

              .............
CORAM:        HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D.N.PATEL
              ------------
For the Petitioner            Mr. Ram Kishore Prasad &
                              Mr. Praful Jojo
For the Respondent-State      Mr. Rajendra Krishna (Sr. S.C.-I)

For the Respondent-University Mr. Anoop Kumar Mehta

———–

8/ Dated 18th February, 2009

1. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner mainly
because the order passed by the respondent-University dated 5th
March, 2003 which is at Annexure-8, whereby rank of the present
petitioner has been reduced from the post of Professor to the post of
Reader.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that fixation of pay
in the UGC pay scale has been made in the post of Reader instead of
Professor and, therefore, the present petition has been preferred
mainly on the ground that there is a breach of principles of natural
justice, over and above several other grounds, which have been
agitated in the memo of the petition.

3. Having heard counsel for both the sides including the Officer
namely, Mr. Anjani Kumar Shrivastava, S/o Late (Dr.) Rama Shankar
Shrivastava, Director, Higher Education, Human Resource
Department, Government of Jharkhand, who is present in the Court, it
appears that no opportunity of being heard is given to the petitioner
before reducing the pay scale of the present petitioner, which is at
Annexure-8.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has also referred
decision rendered by this Court in W.P. (S) No. 4398 of 2002 in the
case of Dr. Braj Kishore Singh Vs Ranchi University & another vide
order dated 6th December, 2007 whereby it has been held that without
giving opportunity of being heard to the petitioner, no accrued and
vested right in the petitioner can be taken away.

2

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.

6. This petition is disposed of.

(D.N. Patel, J.)

Ajay/