SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2021 Supreme(Jhk) 274

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Ravi Ranjan, Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, JJ.
The State of Jharkhand and ors. – Appellants
Versus
Dr. (Mrs.) Karuna Jha, wife of Dr. C.B. Choudhary & Anr. – Respondents
L.P.A. No. 394 of 2018 With I.A. No. 6618 of 2018
Decided On : 11-02-2021

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr. Sreenu Garapati
For the Respondent: Mrs. Ritu Kumar, Dr. Ashok Kumar Singh

Headnote:

Rajenedra Institute of Medical Sciences Act, 2002 - Section 32 - Service Code – Rule 74 (b) and Rule 16 - Constitution of India, 1950 – Article 226 - Post of Civil Assistant Surgeon - Departmental proceeding – Unauthorized Absent from duties – Removal from service - A departmental proceeding has been initiated against writ petitioner-respondent no. 1 on first charge that she has been doing private practice and has been absenting from her duties and second charge was that though she was removed from service by office order for an unauthorized leave of eleven months and doing private practice but inspite of that she gave her joining suo moto and resigned suo moto and has been on unauthorized leave, disobeys the government orders which is undisciplined - Held, Application under Rule 74(b) does not confer any right for separation from service rather it is discretion of State Government to accept or not accept - Court view learned Single Judge was not right in saying that, since there is no misrepresentation, writ petitioner-respondent no. 1 would be entitled for monetary benefit for period without enquiry with respect to conduct of writ petitioner-respondent and without recording a finding as to whether at that point of time writ petitioner was gainfully employed or not - It is settled position of law that Article 226 of Constitution of India confers power on High Court to maintain equity but not for recording sweeping finding that as there is no misrepresentation by writ petitioner-respondent payment has to be made and recovery cannot be allowed without any thorough enquiry taking into consideration of fact that admittedly writ petitioner-respondent has not performed her duty and may be gainfully employed during that period - Appeal allowed.

JUDGMENT :

Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.

1. Heard, Mr. Sreenu Garapati, learned counsel appearing for the appellants, Mrs. Ritu Kumar, learned counsel for the respondent no. 1 and Dr. Ashok Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the respondent-RIMS.

2. This Letters Patent Appeal has been heard through Video Conferencing in view of the guidelines of the High Court taking into account the situation arising due to COVID-19 pandemic. None of the parties have complained about any technical snag of audio-video and with their consent this matter has been heard.

3. The instant intra Court appeal has been filed under Clause 10 of Letters Patent against the judgment dated 26.04.2017 passed in W.P.(S) No. 5125 of 2012 whereby the writ petition has been allowed and resolution dated 25.07.2012 have been quashed whereby, the departmental proceeding has been initiated against the writ-petitioner and Memo dated 20.02.2013 by which the writ petitioner-respondent no.1 has been directed to deposit a sum of Rs. 23,65,858/-in the name of Director, RIMS.

4. The brief facts made in the writ petition which are required to be enumerated herein for proper adjudication of the case are as under:-

    “The writ petitioner-respondent no. 1 was appointed on the post of Civil Assistant Surgeon, Government of Bihar vide Notification No. 1343 (2) dated 13.08.1976. She gave her joining at State Dispensary, Chanho Block, District Ranchi on 19.08.1976. The petitioner-respondent no. 1 was transferred to one place to another and ultimately in the year, 1980 she was transferred to Rajendra Medical College and Hospital, Ranchi. The writ petitioner-respondent no.1 was promoted to the post of Assistant Professor in the year, 1984 and was subsequently promoted to the post of Associate Professor with effect from 21.05.1989. It was further case of the writ petitioner-respondent no. 1 that she was Associate Professor in the Department of Gyneology and Obstetrics, Rajendra Medical College and Hospital, Ranchi. The State of Bihar was reorganized with effect from 15.11.2000 and the State of Jharkhand came into existence on the same date and the writ petitioner-respondent no.1 has been posted in the State of Jharkhand. The State of Jharkhand enacted the provisions of Rajendra Institute of Medical Sciences Act, 2002 in terms thereof Rajendra Medical College and Hospital, Ranchi was converted into an autonomous Institutions and named as Rajendra Institute of Medical Sciences, Ranchi. Rule, Section 13 of the Rajendra Institute of Medical Sciences Act, 2002 provides that all the service rules and regulations which were applicable to the State Government employees would continue to apply on the employees working at the newly created Rajendra Institute of Medical Sciences, Ranchi till appropriate service rules were not framed in terms of Section 32 of Rajenedra Institute of Medical Sciences Act, 2002. No rules in terms of section 32 of the Rajenedra Institute of Medical Sciences Act, 2002 have been framed and as such service conditions applicable to the State Government employees were applicable to the writ petitioner-respondent no. 1 and other doctors/employees working at Rajenedra Institute of Medical Sciences, Ranchi. The service of the writ petitioner-respondent no. 1 was absorbed. It was further case of the writ petitioner-respondent no. 1 that the absorption was conditional, the writ petitioner-respondent no. 1 was promoted to the post of Professor w.e.f. 01.11.2003 by Notification dated 08.04.2004. The writ petitioner-respondent no. 1 was regularly performing her duty but salary from the month of June, 2005 was not paid. The writ petitioner-respondent no. 1 was on earned leave from 07.10.2005 and she gave her joining on 06.01.2006 before the Director, Rajenedra Institute of Medical Sciences, Ranchi which was received on 06.01.2006. It was further case of the writ petitioner-respondent no. 1 that she applied for emergency leave for ten days on 10.01.2006. Since, the writ petitioner-respondent no.1

          Click Here to Read the rest of this document
          1
          2
          3
          4
          5
          6
          7
          8
          9
          10
          11
          SupremeToday Portrait Ad
          supreme today icon
          logo-black

          An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

          Please visit our Training & Support
          Center or Contact Us for assistance

          qr

          Scan Me!

          India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

          For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

          whatsapp-icon Back to top