IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W.P.(S) No.2799 of 2009
1. Satyendra Kumar Singh
2. Tuntun Kumar
3. Sushil Murmu ... ... Petitioners
Versus
State of Jharkhand & Ors. ... ... Respondents
-----
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.R. PRASAD
-----
For the Petitioners : Mr. Rajendra Krishna, Advocate
For the State : J.C. to Sr. S.C.II.
-----
06/14.10.2011
. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and learned
counsel appearing for the State.
This writ application has been preferred by the petitioners, challenging
the order of termination dated 22.06.2009 as contained in Annexure-16 series
to the I.A. No.1881 of 2009, whereby services of the petitioners have been
terminated.
It is the case of the petitioners that all the petitioners were initially
appointed as Chaimman (Zanzeer Wahak). Pursuant to their appointments,
the petitioners joined their services in the year 1985-89. On their joining the
service books were opened and the petitioners continued to work until
22.06.2009 when the services of the petitioners were terminated.
The contention, which has been raised on behalf of the State is that the
appointments of the petitioners were made by the Land Acquisition Officer,
who was not competent to appointment the petitioners and that the procedure
for appointments had never been followed.
It be stated that when services of similarly situated number of
employees also terminated, after they had rendered services for a
considerable long period, they challenged the order of termination which was
set aside. The said order was challenged in LPA which was rejected by the
Division Bench. Both the orders were questioned before the Apex Court. In
one of the cases, the Apex Court in Civil Appeal No.918 of 2008 upheld the
order passed by this Court and directed the State Authority to consider the
case of those persons for regularization.
Under the circumstances, the cases of these petitioners stand on
similar footing as that of Gopal Singh vs State of Jharkhand & Ors.
reported in 2005 (4) JLJR 614 wherein order of termination has been set
aside by this Court and the order passed by this Court has been affirmed by
the Apex Court.
Accordingly, order of termination dated 22.06.2009 as contained in
Annexure-16 series to the I.A. No.1881 of 2009 is hereby quashed.
In the result, this writ application is allowed.
(R.R. Prasad, J.)
Ravi/