MY KOLKATA EDUGRAPH
ADVERTISEMENT
Regular-article-logo Saturday, 04 April 2026

HC reinstates 40 engineers

Read more below

OUR CORRESPONDENT Published 09.11.11, 12:00 AM

Ranchi, Nov. 8: Jharkhand High Court today ordered reinstatement of 40 ad hoc engineers who were posted in the state and had been in service for close to three decades.

A division bench of Chief Justice Prakash Tatia and Justice Jaya Roy held that the engineers who have worked in the state for a long time should not be terminated from their service.

The engineers led by Kamal Prasad had moved the high court in an appeal after a single bench of the same court had affirmed their termination by the state government.

The petitioners are engineers with the road construction department and had moved the high court after they were sacked by chief minister Arjun Munda in September last year. These engineers were appointed by the erstwhile Bihar government on an ad hoc basis.

The engineers challenged the decision of their termination before Jharkhand High Court. The engineers said that they have been working for the last 29 years in erstwhile Bihar and in the state after bifurcation. A single bench of the high court had earlier on July 25 rejected the case of the engineers after which the state government terminated their services.

The counsel for the petitioner said that after bifurcation of the state, the Jharkhand government returned their services to the Bihar government, but the Bihar government refused to absorb them. After a prolonged legal battle, the engineers remained in Jharkhand.

Prasad and the other engineers went in appeal and their counsel today argued that though the engineers were appointed on ad hoc basis, they have been paid their salaries as regular employees of the department by the government. The engineers also receive other benefits and privileges provided to other government employees and have never been treated differently, their counsel said.

The advocate general refuted the arguments of the engineers and said ad hoc appointments could not be confirmed by the government. The engineers were never appointed by the state government and their services were not required. The court was not satisfied by the arguments advanced by the AG and ordered reinstatement of the engineers.

Follow us on:
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT