Smt. Karkmini v. State Of Chhattisgarh

-1NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 2732 of 2016

1. Smt. Karkmini W/o Udnath Singh, Aged About 26 Years R/o Village Velbhandar Chargadh, Post Ramchandarpur, Development, Bnlock Ramchandrapur, Distirct Balrampur Chhatisgarh

2. Budhmaniya Devi, W/o Late Dadan Singh, Aged About 35 Years R/o Village Barwahi, City Colony, Para, Post Dolgi, Police Staiton Sanawal, Post Ramchandrapur, District Balrampur Chhattigarh

3. Nandlal Ravi, S/o Sitaram, Aged About 28 Years R/o Village Talkeshwar, Post Salwahi, Police Staiton Sanawal, Post Ramchandrapur,district Balrampur Chhattisgarh

4. Jokhu Singh S/o Mohan Singhm, Aged About 27 Years R/o Village Lodha, Tahsil Ramanujganj, District Balrampur Chhattisgarh

5. Sumetri Devi W/o Lage Ram Pyari, Aged About 40 Years R/o Village Indrivatipur, Post Sanawal, Police Staiton Sanawal, Post Ramchandarpur, District Balrampur Chhattsigarh

6. Smt. Rukmani Devi W/o Shiv Prasad Singh, Aged About 20 Years R/o Villae Barwahi, Post Dolgi, Police Station, Sanawal, Post Ramchandrapur, District Balrampur Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioners

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of School Educaiton Development, Mantralay, Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur, Chhattisgarh

2. Assistant Commissioner, ( Tribal Development, ) Ramanujganj, District Balrampur , Chhattisgarh

3. Collector, Ramanujganj, Disrict Balrampur Chhattisgarh

4. District Education Officer, Ramanujganj, District Balrampur Chhattisgarh

5. Block Education Officer, Ramanujganj, Dsitrict Balrampur Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For respective Petitioner :

Shri R.K. Bhagat, Advocate For State :

Shri D.R. Minj, Dy. Govt. Advocate

-2S.B.:

Hon'ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Order On Board 07/07/2016

1. This petition has been filed by the Part-Time Sweepers working in various schools in district -Balrampur, whose services have 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 these petitioners were also Part-Time Sweepers appointed in various schools and on similar consideration which weighed at the time of termination of petitioners in above referred petitions, these petitioners were also discontinued from service.

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

3. In a batch of petitions filed by the Part-Time Sweepers working in various schools, 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

-3communications to the effect that thereis 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. At the same time, if any part time sweeper is not attending duties as 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."

4. Prima facie these petitioners also seem to be affected by the enmass termination while working on similar consideration.

5. The petitioners, therefore, would also be entitled to similar benefits if their cases are 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.

6. In view of the above consideration, respondent -Assistant Commissioner Tribal Development, Ramanujganj, District- Balrampur, shall individually examine the case of each of the petitioners and verify facts. If these 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. Considering that the petitioners are very low-paid employee, Assistant Commissioner, Tribal Development, Ramanujganj, District- Balrampur, shall complete the exercise within a maximum period of 90 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

-47. If the petitioners' grievance are not redressed/fully redressed, they will be at liberty to revive their petitions.

Sd/- (Manindra Mohan Shrivastava) Judge Praveen