Jharkhand High Court
Amal Kumar Dey vs Municipal Commissioner on 11 August, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W.P.(S) No. 6682 of 2016
----
Amal Kumar Dey ... Petitioner
-versus-
1. Municipal Commissioner, Dhanbad Municipal Corporation, Bank More,
Dhanbad.
2. Executive Officer, Dhanbad Municipal Corporation, Dhanbad.
3. The State of Jharkhand through its Secretary, Urban Development
Department, Project Building, Dhurwa, Ranchi.
... Respondents
----
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANDA SEN
THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING
----
For the Petitioner : Mr. Rajendra Prasad, Advocate
For the Respondents : Mr. Ajay Kumar Sah, Advocate
Mr. Sreenu Garapati, S.C. III
----
5/ 11.08.2021 Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the
learned counsel for the respondents through Video Conferencing. The lawyers
have no objection with regard to the proceeding, which has been held through
Video Conferencing today at 10.30 a.m. They have no complain in respect to
the audio and video clarity and quality.
2. The issues, which are in dispute, are as follows: -
(i) Whether the petitioner is entitled to get the benefit of the
pay scale, which is granted to Class III employee in view of
the fact that the petitioner has passed matriculation
examination?
(ii) Whether the petitioner is entitled to receive pension, he
being an employee of Dhanbad Municipal Corporation?
(iii) Whether the petitioner is entitled to get the benefit of
Assured Career Progression Scheme?
3. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is already a
matriculate and thus, he is entitled to get his retiral benefits and other benefits
calculating and considering his pay in the scale which a Class III employee is
entitled to receive. He submits that the respondents have calculated all the
benefits treating the petitioner as Class IV employee. He submits that the
petitioner is a matriculate and the respondents should consider his
matriculation certificate.
4. Counsel for the Dhanbad Municipal Corporation submits that for
the first time petitioner has brought the matriculation certificate before this
Court. He submits that as per the records maintained by the Dhanbad
Municipal Corporation, petitioner is shown to be non-matriculate. Thus, the
petitioner was not granted the benefits of pay scale which a Class III employee
is entitled.
5. Mr. Rajendra Prasad, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner
submits that as per the judgment of the Hon'ble Division of this Court in L.P.A.
No.459 of 2018 [Bisheshwar Nand Goswami versus The State of
Jharkhand through its Secretary, Urban Development Department &
Another], the petitioner is entitled for pension.
6. Mr. Ajay Kumar Sah, counsel appearing for Dhanbad Municipal
Corporation submits that the judgment of the Hon'ble Division Bench is to be
considered and then only an appropriate decision can be taken as to whether
the petitioner is entitled for pension or not.
7. Mr. Rajendra Prasad, learned counsel for the petitioner further
submits that the petitioner is entitled to get benefits of Assured Career
Progression Scheme. He submits that in the entire service period, petitioner
was not granted any promotion. It is submitted that since no promotion was
given to the petitioner and he superannuated from service, he is entitled for the
benefits of Assured Career Progression. He submits that on the ground, as
pleaded by the respondents, that no employee of Dhanbad Municipal
Corporation has been given the benefit of Assured Career Progression, the
benefits of Assured Career Progression cannot be denied to the petitioner.
8. Mr. Ajay Kumar Sah, learned counsel for the Dhanbad Municipal
Corporation submits that it is not clear as to whether the scheme of Assured
Career Progression will be made applicable so far as employees of Dhanbad
Municipal Corporation is concerned. He submits that none of the employees of
Dhanbad Municipal Corporation have been granted the benefits of Assured
Career Progression.
9. Considering the submissions of the parties, this Court feels that,
the issues, which are involved, need to be decided first by the Dhanbad
Municipal Corporation. The Municipal Corporation has to decide after taking
into consideration the judgment delivered by the Division Bench of this Court
as to whether the petitioner is entitled for any pension or not. Further the
Municipal Corporation also must take into consideration the matriculation
certificate produced by the petitioner to conclude as to whether the petitioner is
entitled for the scale of pay, which is granted to a Class III employee, since it is
the case of the respondents that the matriculation certificate was produced
before this Court for the first time and the Dhanbad Municipal Corporation is
not aware of the same. The said certificate needs to be verified also by the
Municipal Corporation. The genuineness of the said certificate is also to be
seen.
10. Further no employees have been granted the benefit of Assured
Career Progression, as submitted by the Municipal Corporation, cannot be a
ground to refuse the said benefit to the petitioner. Respondents should
consider this claim also.
11. Considering the aforesaid facts, I direct the petitioner to file a
detailed representation before the respondent No.1 and the respondent No.1,
on receipt of such representation, will consider all the claims of the petitioner,
after verifying the records and the matriculation certificate. If it is found that the
petitioner is entitled to get any monetary benefit, the same should be extended
by the respondents to the petitioner at the earliest. If any claim of the petitioner
is refused, the reasons, thereof, should also be communicated to the
petitioner. The entire process should be completed within a period of 12 weeks
from the date of receipt of representation filed by the petitioner along with a
copy of this order.
12. With the aforesaid observations and directions, this writ petition
stands disposed of.
(Ananda Sen, J.)
Kumar/Cp-02
