ABDUL RAHIM ANSARI Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND
LAWS(JHAR)-2012-5-165
HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND
Decided on May 04,2012

Abdul Rahim Ansari Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF JHARKHAND Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) No one appears on behalf of the petitioner. The respondents have appeared and filed their counter affidavit.
(2.) This writ petition has been preferred by the petitioner to pay the post retiral dues, pension etc. stating that he was retired on 31.08.2000 from the post of Lease Guard under the respondents.
(3.) From perusal of the counter affidavit, it appears that petitioner was appointed on 13.03.1962 on the temporary post of Lease Guard in Daltonganj South Division and was terminated on 28.05.1962. Thereafter, he was again appointed as Lease Guard on 18.01.1963 and his service was again terminated on 07.11.1963. On 3rd time, he was appointed on temporary post of Lease Guard on 03.12.1963 on which he had continued in service up to September, 1967 and thereafter, his service was terminated on 29.12.1967 vide office order no. 84 dated 05.01.1968 issued by the Divisional Forest Officer, Daltonganj South Division as because the petitioner was sent to jail in connection with criminal case and in this way petitioner had served as temporary lease guard for a period of 46 months only from the date of his appointment on 03.12.1963. It has further been stated in paragraph-9 to the counter affidavit that petitioner was involved in two criminal cases at Latehar. In one of which, he was acquitted on 09.10.1967 and in second criminal case the petitioner was sent to jail and later on acquitted on 21.04.1968, but he was not allowed to join his service after his termination on 29.12.1967. Thereafter, the petitioner had approached this Hon'ble High Court on three occasions. One of writ petition being C.W.J.C. No. 2826 of 1993 (R) in which Hon'ble Patna High Court, Ranchi Bench, had disposed of the said writ petition vide order dated 17.07.1998, which is read as under:- At the very outset it can be said that as earlier it has been specifically ordered that no relief can be given in the writ jurisdiction, so the petitioner can very well pursue the matter regarding his reinstatement which is pending before Government according to the petitioner, but certainly no relief can be granted in this writ application.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.