Kalicharan v. State Of Chhattisgarh
NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 2952 of 2016
1. Kalicharan S/o Late Bhuwar Ram Yadav, Aged About 30 Years Occupation Sweeper Middle School Gountiypara Maheshpur R/o Village Maheshpur P. S. & Tahsil Premnagar Distt. Surajpur (Chhattisgarh)
2. Khem Sai S/o Shri Jaggu Ram Aged About 24 Years Occupation Sweeper Middle School Maheshpur R/o Village Maheshpur P. S. & Tahsil Premnagar Distt. Surajpur (Chhattisgarh)
3. Smt. Santoshi Singh W/o Khem Sai Aged About 23 Years Occupation Sweeper Primary School Sakhenmar R/o Village Maheshpur P. S. & Tahsil Premnagar Distt. Surajpur (Chhattisgarh)
4. Jaimangal Singh S/o Shri Dilram Aged About 28 Years Occupation Sweeper Govt. Higher Secondary School Nawaparakala R/o Village Nawaparakala P. S. & Tahsil Premnagar, Distt. Surajpur (Chhattisgarh)
5. Ramkishan Gupta S/o Shri Lalita Prasad Aged About 30 Years Occupation Sweeper Govt. Girls Higher Secondary School Adhina Salka R/o Village Salka Adhina P. S. Bhatgaon Tahsil Bhaiyathan Distt. Surajpur (Chhattisgarh)
6. Nagraj Sonpakar S/o Pyarelal Sonpaker Aged About 36 Years Occupation Sweeper Govt. Primary School Longridand Bhaiyathan R/o Village Jhilmili P. S. & Tahsil Bhaiyathan Distt. Surajpur (Chhattisgarh)
7. Vivek Kumar Naik S/o Umashankar Naik Aged About 23 Years Occupation Sweeper Middle School Harrapara R/o Bhaiyathan P. S. & Tahsil Premnagar Distt. Surajpur (Chhattisgarh) ---- Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Tribal Development Mahanadi Bhawan New Raipur Distt. Raipur (Chhattisgarh)
2. The Commissioner Tribal Development Indrawati Bhawan New Raipur Distt. Raipur (Chhattisgarh)
3. The Collector, Surajpur Distt. Surajpur (Chhattisgarh)
4. The Assistant Commissioner, Tribal Development Surajpur Distt. Surajpur (Chhattisgarh)
5. The District Education Officer, Surajpur Distt. Surajpur (Chhattisgarh)
6. The Block Education Officer, Premnagar Distt. Surajpur (Chhattisgarh)
7. The Block Education Officer, Bhaiyathan Distt Surajpur (Chhattisgarh) ---- Respondents
Shri A.N.Pandey, counsel for the petitioner/s. Shri D.R.Minj, Dy.G.A. for the State.
Hon'ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Order On Board 18/07/2016 1.
This petition has been filed by the Part-Time Sweepers working in various schools in district - Surajpur whose services have been discontinued in the year 2012.
2.
At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that 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 in the same district i.e. Surajpur 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.
Learned State counsel submits that at this stage, it cannot be said that the cases of the petitioners are also identically situated, as it requires verification of facts.
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 Sweepers, 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. 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."
5.
Prima facie, these petitioners also seems 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 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.
7.
In view of the above consideration, respondent - Assistant Commissioner, Tribal Development, Surajpur 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, Surajpur shall complete the exercise within a maximum period of 90 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. If the petitioners' grievance are not redressed/fully redressed, they will be at liberty to revive this petition.
Sd/- Sd/- (Manindra Mohan Shrivastava) Judge Deepti