The Petition for quashing the dismissal order of JAP-5 (Jharkhand Armed Police) relating to the dismissal of the petitioner’s husband from service.
Facts of the Case
The petitioner’s husband was appointed as a constable in Jharkhand Armed Police. Later a case was filed against him and two other persons under IPC. But later all 3 people were acquitted of the case including the petitioner’s husband. The husband of the petitioner died. The petitioner filed a petition earlier before this court but was dismissed under the Bihar Pension Rules, 1950 for not challenging the dismissal order. The petitioner being an illiterate lady was provided with the dismissal order under the Right to Information Act. After receiving the dismissal order, the petitioner represented before the respondent authority for cancellation of the dismissal order. But no decision was taken. Now, the petitioner filed a writ petition to challenge the dismissal order. The co-accused was also granted the arrears in payment. The petitioner made several representations before the respondent- authority to make similar payments. But the difference between both the situation was the delay in time for filing the complaint.
The Counsel representing the Petitioner stated the fact that the petitioner was not able to challenge the dismissal order at first. But as soon as she came to know about the dismissal order, she has been taking continuous steps towards the dismissal order. Counsel mentions the fact that the Court in earlier judgments has provided the liberty and requests with the court to not dismiss the petition on the ground of delay.
The Counsel representing the respondent submits that the petition needs to be dismissed on the ground of delay. It represented the fact that co-accused has been provided with the benefit because of filing the petition in time.
The Court observed that the petitioner is an illiterate lady and she is not able to approach the court in time. The petitioner did not know about the dismissal order. Also, the husband was acquitted and no third-party interest was involved. Liberty is granted in such cases in earlier judgements Referring to the Tukaram Kana Joshi and Ramchandra Shankar Deodhar, the Court ordered the quashing of the dismissal order.
Click here to read Fulena Devi v. State of Jharkhand.
Libertatem.in is now on Telegram. Follow us for regular legal updates and judgment from courts. Follow us on Google News, Instagram, LinkedIn, Facebook & Twitter. You can subscribe to our Weekly Email Updates. You can also contribute stories like this and help us spread awareness for a better society. Submit Your Post Now.