Back
2023 Supreme(Jhk) 1462
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.N. PATHAK, J.
Most. Nilmani Kerketta - Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand through Secretary, Rural Engineering Organization, Ranchi and Ors. - Respondents
W.P.(S). No. 4581 of 2021
Decided On : 17-10-2023
For the Petitioner: Mr. Niladri Shekhar Mukherjee, Adv., Mrs. Sandhya Singh, Adv., Mr. Ashraf Ansari, Adv.
For the Respondents: Mr. Ashutosh Anand, AAG-III
The court determined that administrative faults should not penalize the employee's family, necessitating reevaluation of service and benefits.
Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Articles 14, 15, 16, 21, 300-A - Claim for regularization of service - Petitioner sought direction for regularizing absence period of deceased husband, whose absence was treated as break in service by respondents. Petitioner’s claims for salary and benefits were denied by the respondents citing unauthorized absence - Court found no fault on the part of petitioner’s husband; action of respondents held unjustified. (Paras 2, 9, 10)
(B) Employment law - Fairness and reasonableness - The court emphasized the need for fair consideration of long service (34 years) and the necessity of treating absence without fault in an equitable manner. (Paras 9, 10)
Facts of the case:
The deceased employee, served from 20.02.1980 to 31.05.2014 but claimed absences were contested by the respondents as unauthorized; the petitioner suffered financial hardships after the death of her husband on 03.10.2019.
Findings of Court:
The petitioner’s case was deserving of consideration due to the fault being with the respondents for not posting her husband appropriately, thus service claims should be re-evaluated.
Issues: Whether the attempt to regularize the deceased's service is justifiable; the legal implications of service breaks due to administrative faults.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the denial of benefits to the petitioner was unjust and ordered the respondents to re-evaluate based on the established service record without penalizing the petitioner for administrative shortcomings.
Result: Writ petition allowed.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner seeks regularization and benefits due to husband's service. (Para 2 , 3 , 5) |
| 2. court's analysis of unauthorized absence and employer’s liability. (Para 4 , 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 3. arguments highlight entitlement to salary and retirement benefits. (Para 6) |
| 4. arguments from both sides regarding absence and benefits highlight discrepancies in handling the late husband's case. (Para 7) |
| 5. final ruling to allow the writ petition and direct further action. (Para 11 , 12) |
JUDGMENT :
(S.N. Pathak, J.)
Heard the parties.
2. Petitioner, who is the wife of deceased employee, Anand Kerketta has approached this Court with a prayer for direction upon the respondents for regularizing the period of absence from service of her husband from 08.11.2006 to 25.05.2009 and from 27.05.2009 to 31.05.2014, which has been treated as break in service by the respondent.
Petitioner has further prayed for direction upon the respondents to release all consequential benefits treating the service of petitioner’s deceased husband as without break as he has served the department for 25 long years.
3. Shorn of unnecessary details, the husband of petitioner, was initially appointed as Road Roller Khalasi vide letter No. 8308 dated 16.11.1979, issued from the office of the Chief Engineer, R.E.O., Bihar, Patna and pursuant thereto, he gave his joining on 20.02.1980 and was posted at Garhwa Sub-division. Thereafter, in view of letter dated 05.05.2004 of the Joint Secretary, Rural Development Department, Ranchi, the husband of the petitioner Anand Kerketta (since deceased) was considered for regularization of his service and accordingly, a letter dated 27.05.2004 was issued by the Superintending Engineer, R.E.O. Work Division, Dumka to the petitioner asking him to produce relevant documents for consideration of his case, which the petitioner duly submitted before the said Authority. Thereafter, the Superintending Engineer, R.E.O., Work Circle, Hazaribagh issued order contained in memo No. 822 dated 27.09.2006 by which the petitioner’s husband was absorbed in regular service to the post of Driver at Chatra in the pay-scale of Rs.3050-75-1950-80-4590 along with D.A. and other allowances as payable from time to time by the Government. On receipt of the aforesaid order, the husband of petitioner submitted his joining before the Executive Engineer, Works Division, Chatra on 18.10.2006 but in spite of giving joining at Chatra, the salary has not been paid since 2005 and therefore he gave representation on 27.02.2007 and 02.02.2008 to the Chief Engineer, R.E.O., Ranchi with request to release the salary but the same went into vain.
4. The respondents have taken a plea that husband of petitioner remained absent unauthorizedly since 08.11.2006, hence, his claim for payment of salary and other benefits is not acceptable, whereas the fact remains that petitioner went to give his joining on 18.10.2006, which has not been accepted and the husband of petitioner was permitted to work on the post of Jeep Driver at Chatra. So there is no laches on the part of her husband in remaining out of service. However, to his utter shock and surprise, the petitioner’s husband received speaking order contained in memo No. 417 dated 19.07.2019, issued by the Superintending Engineer, REO, Work Circle, Hazaribagh, whereby it has been informed that on the basis and available evidences, it appears that there has been a break in service from 08.11.2006 to 25.05.2009 and from 27.05.2009 to 31.05.2014 and since his regular appointment to the post of Jeep Driver was done on a temporary and provisional basis and due to above break in service, the prayer of petitioner for service confirmation and salary, etc. for the above period cannot be entertained.
5. It is the specific case of petitioner that her husband has served the Department from 20.02.1980 to 31.05.2014 i.e. more than 34 years with full devotion and satisfaction to the respondent-Department but inspite of the same his prayer has
