Biraj Kujur vs The State of Jharkhand

Shree Chandrashekhar, J.—Grievance of the petitioner is that one Hem Shankar Pandey-respondent no. 6 has been made In-charge Headmaster.

Heard.

The petitioner and respondent no. 6 both were appointed Assistant Teachers on 28.05.1982. The petitioner gave his joining on 05.07.1982 whereas, the respondent no. 6 joined the said post on 12.07.1982. The respondent-State has pleaded that the appointment letter itself recites that inter-se seniority of the appointees would be fixed according to their position in the appointment letter. It is not in dispute that the petitioner''s name appears at Serial No. 39 whereas, the respondent no. 6 finds place at Serial No. 7 in the appointment letter. It is also an admitted fact that in the gradation list of 1993, petitioner was placed at Serial No. 51 whereas, the respondent no. 6 was placed at Serial No. 36. The petitioner has claimed that he has been granted Junior Selection Grade as well as Senior Selection Grade. From the impugned order dated 18.05.2007 it appears that previously respondent no. 6 was transferred to Rajkiya Sanskrit Uccha Vidyalaya, Medninagar, Palamau and was posted as In-charge Headmaster however, the Director, Secondary Education vide order dated 10.02.2006 cancelled the order of aforesaid posting. Aggrieved, respondent no. 6 approached this Court in W.P.(S) No. 1662 of 2006 which was disposed of vide order dated 12.09.2006 directing the Director, Secondary Education to decide the rival claims. Impugned order dated 18.05.2007 has been passed in compliance of the aforesaid order of the Writ Court.

From the materials brought on record it appears that previously respondent no. 6 was found guilty of misconduct and penalty was also imposed upon him, and on this ground Director, Secondary Education had interfered with order dated 15.12.2005 where under the respondent no. 6 was posted as In-charge Headmaster. Now, in the impugned order dated 18.05.2007 the Director, Secondary Education has taken a stand that the order of punishment would not come in way of respondent no. 6 and thus, he can be validly posted to the post of In-charge Headmaster. The aforesaid reason assigned by respondent no. 3 is patently unsustainable, however, in view of the fact that the petitioner and respondent no. 6 have been fighting over the post of In-charge Headmaster which admittedly, is an ad-hoc arrangement, provision for which has been made for a contingency when post of regular Headmaster falls vacant, I am not inclined to interfere in the matter. It appears that the petitioner was made In-charge Headmaster on 03.06.1997 and since then the post of Headmaster is vacant in Rajkiya Sanskrit Uccha Vidyalaya, Medninager, Palamau. The situation which has been brought to the notice of this Court is really disturbing. In the courter-affidavit the respondents have not disclosed a reason why a regular Headmaster has not been appointed in the said school. I am of the opinion that the State is under a duty to make regular appointment on the post of Headmaster, within a reasonable period from the date the post of Headmaster falls vacant.

Considering the peculiar facts of the case, I decline to interfere with the impugned order dated 18.05.2007. However, respondent no. 3 is directed to ensure that regular Headmaster is posted in Rajkiya Sanskrit Uccha Vidyalaya, Medninagar, Palamu, within a period of two months.

The writ petition stands dismissed however, with the aforesaid direction.