Suresh Pandey vs State Of Jharkhand & Ors on 24 February, 2010

Jharkhand High Court
Suresh Pandey vs State Of Jharkhand & Ors on 24 February, 2010
                               IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI
                                W.P (PIL) No.      1993       OF 2009
     Suresh Pandey
     1.State of Jharkhand
     2.Secretary, State Transport Corporation, Jharkhand
     3.Divisional Manager, BSRTC, Ranchi/Bihar
     4.Divisional Manager, BSRTC, Jamshedpur
     5.Divisional Manager, BSRTC, Dhanbad
     6.Divisional Manager, BSRTC, Dumka

     CORAM                              HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
                                       HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.R.PRASAD

     For the Appellant/Petitioner                   Mr.P.C.Tripathy, Sr.Advocate

     For the Respondent                             Mr.P.A.S.Pati, JC to AG


This writ petition has been filed in public interest by the petitioner, Sri

Suresh Pandey, inter alia, seeking several directions including the one to the effect

that the respondent-State ofJharkhand should be directed to reconstitute State Road

Transport Corporation in order to utilize 35% of the assets which it had received by

virtue of the order passed by the Supreme Court after bifurcation of the Bihar State

Road Transport Corporation (hereinafter called as B.S.R.T.C). Several other directions

have also been sought in the writ petition, which, in substance, indicate that the

petitioner is aggrieved of the fact that the respondent-State of Jharkhand has no plan in

regard to utilization of the assets which it had received after bifurcation of the

B.S.R.T.C and that when the State of Jharkhand was formed, the buses which had

been received by the respondent-State were not being utilized properly, nor the

employees of the Corporation were engaged in utilization of the assets by running the

buses with the result that the State Transport Corporation Depots are lying vacant and

are occupied by anti-social elements.

In response to the show cause notice, which had been issued to the

respondents, a detailed affidavit has been filed by the respondent-State giving out the

details and the manner in which 35% of the assets of the B.S.R.T.C, which had been

transferred to the State of Jharkhand, would be used, utilized and dealt with. The reply

also refers to the order passed by the Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No.7290/1994 in

the matter of Suraj Deo Singh Vs. State of Bihar & Ors. The employees of the

B.S.R.T.C had filed a writ petition before the Patna High Court claiming arrears of
salary and other allowances which had not been paid for a long time. An order was

passed by the Patna High Court, against which a Special Leave Petition in the

Supreme Court was preferred. The Supreme Court took into account the plight of the

employees of the B.S.R.T.C who had not been paid their salary for many months and

also the plight of those who had retired or died without their salary or retiral benefits

being paid for want of fund. In pursuance to the directions of the Supreme Court, a

revival package was chalked out and the assets of the B.S.R.T.C were divided into two

parts out of which one part was to be entrusted to the State of Bihar and 35% was to

be received by the State of Jharkhand. Simultaneously an Arbitration Committee also

had been constituted in order to determine the fate of the employees, who had been

discharging duties in the B.S.R.T.C, while the State of Bihar and State of Jharkhand

was a unified State. However, after bifurcation, the recommendations of the Arbitration

Committee were discussed under the chairmanship of the Chief Secretary,

Government of Jharkhand, wherein it was decided to constitute a High Level

Committee headed by the Member, Board of Revenue, to look into the fate of the

employees who had become the part of the State of Jharkhand in consequence of the

division of the B.S.R.T.C from the midnight of 28.2.2009 on as is where is basis. The

quantum which fell into the share of the State of Jharkhand, were admittedly 35%, but

it was submitted that the State of Jharkhand as of now has decided not to constitute

another Corporation in the State of Jharkhand but has decided to utilize the assets of

35% through the Transport Department and for this purpose, it proposes to utilize the

72 buses which it has received as part of its share of 35% and 73 buses which had

already been obtained by the State on as is where is basis. It has been categorically

stated that 73 buses are being plied on various routes including a few on inter-State

routes. In so far as the state of employees are concerned, the same has already been

dealt with in pursuance to the recommendation of the Arbitration Committee, which had

been constituted in pursuance to the order of the Supreme Court.

The facts, which have been given out by the State of Jharkhand in its

counter-affidavit, appear to have taken care of the issues which have been raised by

the petitioner in this writ petition and the issues had also been addressed before the

Supreme Court.

In view of the explanation and reply filed by the State of Jharkhand

regarding the operation of the buses through the Transport Department and in absence

of the material to the effect that it is not functioning properly, this Court finds no reason

to enter into the matter further. The cause raised by the petitioner in this writ petition

has duly and adequately been addressed by the respondent-State as per its counter-

affidavit, which has not even been refuted by the petitioner.

In view of the above-mentioned facts, this writ petition be treated as

disposed of.

(Gyan Sudha Misra, C.J)


Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published.

* Copy This Password *

* Type Or Paste Password Here *

Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies. More Information