- (1.) HEARD the learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the documents on record.
(2.) THE husband of the petitioner was appointed as Warder in District Jail, Chaibasa. He continued in service till the year, 2005. When by order dated 02.11.2005 his salary was stopped, the husband of the petitioner along with others approached this Court in W.P.(S) No. 433 of 2007 which was disposed of by order dated 05.04.2007 directing the respondent no. 2 to consider the claim of the petitioner and pass an appropriate order. It was also directed by this Court that, if the petitioners were found entitled to get their salary, it would be paid to the petitioners therein within a period of six weeks thereafter.
(3.) A perusal of the memorandum of W.P.(S) No. 433 of 2007 would disclose that the husband of the petitioner had challenged order dated 02.11.2005 and a prayer was also made for regularising the service of the petitioners therein. Pursuant to order passed by this Court on 05.04.2007, order dated 10.03.2008 was passed noticing that the husband of the petitioner continued in service for more than 20 years and therefore, he should be paid salary. It has also been observed in order dated 10.03.2008 that, there are 32 posts of Warder and 10 posts of Senior Warder still vacant in Birsa Munda Central Jail, Hotwar, Ranchi. By order dated 10.03.2008, the Home Secretary, Government of Jharkhand directed the Jail Superintendent to take a decision in the matter however, since no decision was taken and in the meantime, the husband of the petitioner died on 23.07.2012, the petitioner approached the authorities for regularisation of the service of her husband and for her appointment on compassionate ground. A counter -affidavit has been filed taking a stand that the husband of the petitioner was a temporary Warder and work taken from him was need based and therefore, the claim of the petitioner is liable to be rejected. Paragraph Nos. 11 to 13 of the counter -affidavit are extracted below: 11. That it is stated that therefore appellants husband late Pashupati Singh as a temporary warder always worked as need based of his duty of the Jail on the ground that any time it can be removed from his duty. That is why such type of job or temporary basis cannot be taken as a regular appointment. Then, question does not arise of pension, Gratuity etc. like Govt. regular employee that is why the claim can be dismissed. 12. That it is stated that Amid, Benjamin Hembram and others has filed a WPS No. 433/2007 in Hon'ble High Court, Ranchi because the jail superintendent Central jail, Ranchi had stopped their wages. Hon'ble High Court had passed an order dated 4.4.2007 that the Secretary, Department of Home Jharkhand, Ranchi to consider the petitioners claim and pass appropriate order in accordance with law within a period six weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. If the petitioners are found entitled to get their salary, the arrear of the same must be paid to the petitioners. 13. That it is stated that in the light of above order of Hon'ble High Court, the Secretary, Home Department of Jharkhand, Ranchi has passed standing order after hearing both parties petitioners as well as Jail authority. If wages of petitioner's are held up wages should be paid. The Personal Administrative Reforms department, Bihar has issued a letter no. 5940 dated 18.6.1993 that temporary deployed before dated 1.8.1985 may be absorbed as per rule provided by Govt. and availability of vacant post. Petitioner's deployments are after the dated 1.8.1985 hence above mentions letter of memo no. 5940 dated 18.6.1993 the Personal Administrative Reforms department Bihar is not effective in this case.;