Munshi Lal Mahto vs Sudhir Tripathy

2025 INSC 62 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA INHERENT JURISDICTION CONTEMPT PETITION (C) NO. 115 OF 2019 IN CIVIL APPEAL NO. 2703 OF 2017

SRI MUNSHI LAL MAHTO AND ORS. PETITIONER(S)

VERSUS

SRI SUDHIR TRIPATHY AND ORS. RESPONDENT(S)

ORDER

1. The petitioners in the present contempt petition are aggrieved

by the alleged non-compliance of the order dated 31.08.2017 passed

in Civil Appeal No. 2703 of 2017 and batch titled as “Krishna

Nand Yadav & others Vs. Magadh University & others”.

2. During hearing, it has been informed that except petitioner No.

4, rest of the petitioners are receiving their legible claims since their

respective date of absorption, hence they do not wish to press this Signature Not Verified

contempt petition. Accordingly, the contempt petition in respect of Digitally signed by NIDHI AHUJA Date: 2025.01.10 18:03:36 IST Reason:

petitioner nos. 1 to 3 and 5 stands dismissed.

1

3. So far as petitioner No. 4 is concerned, briefly put, he was

appointed on the post of Typist in P.P.K. College, Bundu (Ranchi) on

09.09.1985. The claim of the petitioner regarding absorption was

allowed by Mr. Justice S.B. Sinha (Retd.) One Man Commission

(hereinafter referred to as ‘J. Sinha Commission’) vide order dated

29.10.2015, corrected by order dated 04.12.2015. The said order

was confirmed by this Court vide order dated 31.08.2017 in Krishna

Nand Yadav (supra), subject to furnishing declaration by the

petitioner regarding continuously working and attending the college

regularly since the date of appointment till date, or in case of

retirement till the date of retirement and that he did not work

anywhere else. Vide a notification dated 06.08.2018 of the Ranchi

University, he was absorbed w.e.f. 01.07.2015.

4. The petitioner submits that after the absorption order of the

University he has not received his arrears of salary. The contemnor –

Chief Secretary, State of Jharkhand in his counter affidavit has

stated that after receipt of the notification dated 06.08.2018 from the

University and on scrutiny of his certificates, it was found that he

was minor on the date of his appointment, i.e., 09.09.1985, as well

2 as on cut-off date. Therefore, his pay fixation was rejected.

5. The State of Jharkhand in its reply to the written submissions

of the petitioner No. 4 has stated that the date of birth of the

petitioner No. 4 is 05.08.1968 and this crucial fact was concealed by

him. Since, he was a minor on the date of his appointment as well as

on the cutoff date he was ineligible for such appointment and

accordingly, his pay was not fixed. Further, since his appointment is

void ab-initio, a detailed enquiry of the original records in regard to

continuity of his service has not been done in furtherance of order

dated 07.08.2019 of this Court passed in Contempt Petition (C) No.

1188 of 2018 titled as “Baidya Nath Choudhary Vs. Dr. Sree

Surendra Kumar Singh.” Hence, there is no case of willful non-

compliance.

6. We have perused the documents placed and noted that the

order of rejection of pay fixation is not on record. It is further noted

that after the absorption notification issued by the University;

nothing has been brought for de-notifying petitioner no. 4’s

absorption.

3

7. Having considered the submissions, the factual scenario of the

matter, counter affidavit of the contemnors and the tenor of the

orders passed in subsequent proceedings in Contempt Petition (C) No.

1188 of 2018 Baidya Nath Choudhary (supra), we find that the

issues regarding date of birth, pay fixation, payment of salary and

arrears require adjudication, which we are not inclined to hold in this

Contempt Petition.

8. As per above discussions, in our view, it would be appropriate

to direct the authorities to adjudicate all the said issues through

Registrar/Vice Chancellor in view of the judgment of State of Bihar

& others vs Bihar Rajya M.S.E.S.K.K.M & others (2005) 9 SCC

129 and accordingly, we dispose of this petition with the following

directions:

(i) The petitioner No. 4 shall submit his claim

regarding date of birth, pay fixation and arrears of

salary along with relevant documents before the

Registrar/Vice Chancellor of the University by

February 28, 2025. On receiving such claim, it be

adjudicated affording due opportunity to the

4 employee, college concerned, representative of the

State and a reasoned order be passed within a

period of three months.

(ii) In case the parties feel dissatisfied by the orders

of the Registrar/Vice Chancellor of the University,

they shall be at liberty to take recourse as

permissible before the High Court.

9. In view of the foregoing, the present contempt petition stands

disposed of. Pending interlocutory application(s), if any, stands

disposed of.

……...........………............J. [ J. K. MAHESHWARI ]

……............………...........J. [ RAJESH BINDAL ]

New Delhi;

January 08, 2025.

5