Rongon Mukhopadhyay, J. - (1.) In this application, the petitioner has prayed for a direction upon the respondents to reinstate the petitioner on the post of clerk -cum -cashier and to make payment of entire arrears of salary for the period from April, 1998 till date with all consequential benefits. A further prayer has been made for quashing the order dated 12.12.2007 as contained in memo No. 1946 issued under the signature of respondent No. by which the services of the petitioner has been terminated.
(2.) Concisely stated the facts of the present case is that a vacancy was published for the appointment of clerk cum cashier by the Industries Department (Handloom & Sericulture) in the erstwhile State of Bihar for Santhal Paragna and the petitioner had applied against the said vacant post and having found him fit for the post he was appointed as clerk cum cashier in terms of memo No. 185 dated 25.10.1984 by the General Manager, District Industry Centre, Dumka, Santhal Paragna. The petitioner in course of his service tenure was confirmed and was also granted increment from time and he had also passed the accounts examination. In the gradation list which was published by the Department, name of the petitioner figured at serial No. 117. The petitioner was granted time bound promotion and monetary benefits vide memo No. 180 dated 30.5.1995 on the basis of direction and instruction issued by the Director, Handloom & Sericulture, Bihar, Patna. However, a letter dated 21.4.1998 as contained in memo No. 887 was issued to the petitioner asking him to show cause as to why his services should not be terminated as the appointing authority of the petitioner was not delegated with the power to appoint any person. The petitioner had submitted his show cause and thereafter vide order dated 4.10.2004, the petitioner was terminated from service by the Director of Industries & Sericulture, Bihar, Patna which was challenged in W.P.(S) No. 6386 of 2004. The order of termination dated 4.10.2004 was set aside, as after bifurcation, the services of the petitioner being finally allocated to the State Jharkhand, the authorities of the State of Bihar did not have the power to terminate the services of the petitioner. In the said order, the Director, Department of Industries (Handloom & Sericulture), Jharkhand, Ranchi was given an opportunity to pass a speaking order in accordance with law. The respondent No. 2 herein pursuant to the direction of this Court had passed the impugned order dated 12.12.2007 by terminating the service of the petitioner.
(3.) Heard Mr. J.P. Jha, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. Ashish Thakur, learned J.C. to Sr. S.C. I, appearing for the respondents.;