Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 21965 (JHR)

Aale Hassan v. Animal Husbandary Department

WPC/5672/2015 · 2025-08-14

Deepak Roshan

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2025:JHHC:24803 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(S) No. 5672 of 2015 -- Aale Hassan Son of Ibne Hassan Resident of Kumhartoll, P.O and P.S Doranda, District Ranchi ....Petitioner. Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. The Secretary. Animal Husbandry & Fisheries Department, Government of Jharkhand, office at Nepal House, P.O and P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi 3. The Deputy Secretary, Animal Husbandry & Fisheries Department, Government of Jharkhand, office at Nepal House, P.O and P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi 4. The Regional Director, Animal Husbandry & Fisheries Department, Government of Jharkhand, office at Nepal House, P.O and P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi 5. Sub Divisional Officer, Animal Husbandry & Fisheries Department, Ranchi office at Nepal House, P.O and P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi ...Respondents -- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN -- For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Abhishek Kumar, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Rakesh Kr. Roy, A.C to G.A.-III -- 13/14.08.2025 Mr. Abhishek Kumar, learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the petitioner himself has taken No Objection Certificate. 2. From the record, it appears that after that no fresh Vakalatnama has been filed; as such, the case is being disposed of on the basis of available record and submission of learned counsel for the Respondents. 3. The instant writ application has been preferred by the Petitioner praying for a direction upon the Respondent Authorities to quash and set aside the order of termination issued under Memo no. 761 dated 16.05.2016. 4. By relying upon paragraph nos. 11 to 15, Ld. Counsel for the Respondents submits that the writ petitioner was appointed on Class-IV post in Animal Husbandry Department and posted in the 1st Class Veterinary Dispensary Hesag, Ranchi. The petitioner was 2025:JHHC:24803 2 willfully absent from his duty for more than 5 years i.e. from 01.03.2002 to 09.07.2009. Without giving any information either to his controlling officer or to the department unauthorizedly, he absented from his duty and due to continuous unauthorized absence from duty; the petitioner's controlling officer, informed Sub Divisional Animal Husbandry Officer, Ranchi stating that the petitioner was unauthorizedly absent from his duty since 01.03.2002. Accordingly, Show Cause Notice was served to the petitioner and thereafter charge was framed against the petitioner and departmental proceeding was initiated. Second show cause was also served to the petitioner. After following the principle of natural justice and the procedure established under law the final order of termination was passed against the petitioner vide Memo No. 761 dated 16.05.2016 in pursuance of Bihar/Jharkhand Service code. For brevity, Rule 76 is extracted herein below:- "Employee who is absence from duty more than five year can be terminated only after conducting of departmental proceeding." 5. The State Counsel further submits that the plea taken by the petitioner for absence from duty since 01.03.2002 was that he was admitted in RIIMS. Hospital, Ranchi and he was under treatment in RIIMS, Ranchi from 05.03.2002 to 24.08.2005 and he was advised complete bed rest for the aforesaid years. Though he had not submitted any document with respect to his admission to RIIMS, Hospital, Ranchi but the petitioner had submitted certificate issued by the Superintendent, RIIMS, Ranchi vide Memo No. 3111 dated 25.08.2005 wherein it has been stated that "This is to certify that Md. Aale Hasan Anu Sewak. Husbandry Hospital, Hesag, Ranchi was suffering from infectable spanatytitits back bone from 05.03.2002 to 24.08.2005 vide hospital OPD No. 1187/2002 (Surery) and have also suffering from ability of walk. He 2025:JHHC:24803 3 was advised complete bed rest for above noted period. Now he is fit to resume his all duties properly." 6. Ld. Counsel cfurther submitted that the aforesaid certificate contained in Memo No. 3111 dated 25.08.2005 was sent for verification to the Office of Superintendent, RIIMS, Ranchi and the said authority vide Letter No. 3442 dated 07.04.2024 informed that the aforesaid certificate submitted by the petitioner was never been issued from their office and it is fake and fabricated. 7. He further submits that petitioner in order to gain the undue benefit from the department and just to hide his wrong manufactured the aforesaid fake and fabricated certificate and filed the same before this Court on affidavit and has committed this gross misconduct not from the department but also to this Court. He further submits that for the aforesaid act of preparing forged and fabricated document just to gain undue benefit, the petitioner has committed offence and accordingly FIR Being Jagarnathpur P.S. Case No, 392/2024 has been lodged against the petitioner. 8. So far as payment of GPF amount and Group Insurance is concerned; the Respondents have made their best effort to gather information related to Bank Account Number, Adhard Card, Pan Card etc. from the petitioner by various letters as well as from telephonic communication, but the petitioner refused to provide the same. Without having Bank Account Number, IFSC Code, Pan Number, it is not possible to pay the GPF amount and Group Insurance as evident from the Letter contained in memo No. 373 dated 03.09.2024. 9. Having regard to the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and after going through the records, it appears that though the petitioner has 2025:JHHC:24803 4 committed fraud but the Respondents have taken much effort to gather information relating to Bank Account No., Aadhar Card and Pan No. etc. from the Petitioner by various letters annexed as Annexure-C of the counter affidavit, but the Petitioner did not provide the same, as a result of which the said amount of G.P.F and Group Insurance have also not been paid to the Petitioner, for which the respondents are not responsible. 10. Having regard to the aforesaid discussions, no relief can be granted to this petitioner and the instant writ application stands dismissed. Pending I.A(s), if any, stands closed. (Deepak Roshan, J.) Jk AFR