Ramsurat Yadav v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 4600 of 2016

1. Ramsurat Yadav S/o Sumeshwar Yadav, Aged About 35 Years Part Time Sweeper Middle School Primary School Khairy, R/o Village- Khairy, Village Panchayat Jhilmili, Police Station And Tahsil- Bhaiyathan, DistrictSurajpur Chhattisgarh.

2. Ramavatar, S/o Ramvriksh Thakur, Aged About 32 Years Part Time Sweeper Middle School, Jhilmili, R/o Village- Jhilmili, Police Station And Tahsil Bhaiyathan, District- Surajpur Chhattisgarh.

3. Kumj Bihari, S/o Late Ramcharan, Aged About 33 Years Part Time Sweeper Middle School Parsapara, R/o Village- Parsapara, Police Station And Tahsil Premnagar, District Surajpur Chhattisgarh.

4. Sunil Kumar Yadav, S/o Ramkeshwar Yadav, Aged About 27 Years Part Time Sweeper Govt. Primary School Beltikari, R/o Village- Dhawaidand, Police Station And Tahsil Bhaiyathan, District- Surajpur Chhattisgarh. ---- Petitioners

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through- The Secretary, Department Of Tribal Development Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur, District- Raipur Chhattisgarh.

2. The Commissioner, Tribal Development Indrawati Bhawan, New Raipur, District- Raipur Chhattisgarh.

3. The Collector, Surajpur, District- Surajpur Chhattisgarh.

4. The Assistant Commissioner, Tribal Development Surajpur, DistrictSurajpur Chhattisgarh.

5. The District Education Officer, Surajpur, District- Surajpur Chhattisgarh.

6. The Block Education Officer, Bhaiyathan, District- Surajpur Chhattisgarh. ---- Respondents -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For Petitioners :

Mr. A. N. Pandey, Advocate For State :

Mr. R.K. Gupta, Dy. A.G.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hon'ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Order On Board 08/09/2016 1.

This petition has been filed by the Part-Time Sweeper working in a school of District -Surajpur whose service has been discontinued in the year 2012.

2.

At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the large number of similarly situated Part-Time Sweepers were

discontinued from service and they had filed petitions before this Court. All those petitions were disposed off by a common order dated 9.9.2015. It is submitted that the petitioners herein are identically situated as the petitioners in those petitions, because the petitioners were also Part-Time Sweepers appointed in the school of same district i.e. Surajpur and on similar consideration which weighed at the time of termination of petitioners in above referred petitions, the petitioners were also discontinued from service. 3.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the Part-Time Sweepers are low rank of employees and very meagerly paid. Therefore, in these circumstances, the petition may be finally disposed off with a direction to respondents to examine their individual case and on parity, similar relief may be granted. 4.

In a batch of petitions filed by Part-Time Sweepers working in various schools in the same district where the petitioners were also working as Part-Time Sweeper, this Court had an occasion to examine the correctness of decision taken by the authority towards enmass termination of Part-Time Sweepers. The reasons assigned for enmass termination, as reflected in the case of Rameshwar Prasad Rajwar & Ors. Vs. State of Chhattisgarh & Ors. and batch of petitions, show that the appointments were illegally made by wrongly construing and interpreting direction of the State Govt. This Court after hearing the parties, held as below: "7.

Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, it would appear that even if the respective principals/head masters were not informed or authorized to make appointment, the fact remains that the State Government had earlier issued communications to the effect that there is no restriction for appointing part time sweepers. It has not been disputed by the respondents that the petitioners were infact appointed by the respective principals/head masters prior to issuance of the order (Annexure-P-1) and the order (Annexure-P-7). Once the appointments have been made, even on part time basis, mass cancellation of appointments, without there being any specific individual allegation of corruption or nepotism is not permissible.

he belongs to some other village or is otherwise not efficient in his work, it always remains open for the concerned head of the department or the appointing authority to initiate action, as the petitioners have no right to hold the post, being only part time sweepers."

5.

Prima facie, the petitioners also seem to be affected by the enmass termination while working in the same district and on similar consideration.

6.

The petitioners, therefore, would also be entitled to similar benefits if their case is similarly situated as the case of those petitioners who had earlier approached this Court and in whose favour, common order was passed on 9.9.2015.

7.

In view of the above consideration, respondent -Assistant Commissioner Tribal Development, Surajpur, shall individually examine the case of the petitioners and verify facts. If the petitioners are similarly situated as the petitioners in earlier batch of petitions, which was decided on 9.9.2015, the benefits which have accrued to those petitioners and as ordered by this Court earlier in the case of Rameshwar Prasad Rajwar (supra) shall also be granted to these petitioners.

8.

Considering that the petitioners are very low-paid employees, Assistant Commissioner, Tribal Development, Surajpur, shall complete the exercise within a maximum period of 90 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

9.

If the petitioners' grievance is not redressed/fully redressed, they will be at liberty to revive their petition.

Sd/- (Manindra Mohan Shrivastava) Judge Rekha