Jharkhand High Court
Jeevendra Kunwar vs The State Of Jharkhand Through The ... on 18 August, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W.P.(S) No. 2157 of 2021
Jeevendra Kunwar .... .... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Jharkhand through the Secretary,
Department of Agriculture,
Animal Husbandry and Co-operative, Ranchi.
2. The Joint Secretary, Department of Agriculture,
Animal Husbandry and Co-operative, Ranchi.
3. The Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Jharkhand, Ranchi.
.... .... Respondents
------
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DR. S.N. PATHAK
(Through Video Conferencing)
------
For the Petitioner : Mr. Mrinal Kanti Roy, Advocate
For the Respondents : Mr. Achyut Keshav, G.P.-I
-----
4 / 18.8.2021 The petitioner has approached this Court with the prayer for
direction to the respondents to pay the amount of gratuity, pension and other
post-retirement benefits along with penal interest from the date of retirement
till the date of their actual payment and further direct the respondents to pay
interest for the delay of one and half years on the earned leave of the
petitioner.
As per the factual matrix, the petitioner was appointed as
Assistant Registrar, Cooperative Societies in the erstwhile State of Bihar on
1.5.1987. After serving for long years with utter satisfaction of the
respondents, the petitioner attained the age of superannuation on 31.7.2018.
Though, the petitioner retired, but till date he has been deprived of the
benefits of gratuity, pension and other post-retirement benefits. It is the
specific case of the petitioner that he represented before the Authority for
payment of the same, but the respondents instead of ensuring payment of
post-retirement benefits, issued Memo No. 199 dated 30.1.2019 initiating a
departmental proceeding under Rule 139 of the Jharkhand Pension Rules.
Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner had approached this Court for
quashing of initiation of departmental proceeding in W.P.(S) No. 748 of
2019. This Court after hearing the parties, quashed the order of initiation of
departmental proceeding under Rule 139 of the Jharkhand Pension Rules, as
the same was done without adhering to the cardinal principles of natural
justice. Placing heavy reliance on the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court,
rendered in the case of Mohd. Idris Ansari, reported in 1995 Suppl (3) SCC
56, it was clearly observed that the stage for invoking Rule 139 of the
Jharkhand Pension Rules has not come as yet and in view of the same, the
impugned order dated 30.1.2019 was quashed.
Though the order for initiation of departmental proceeding
was quashed and set aside by this Court vide its order dated 16.12.2020, not
a single farthing has been paid to the petitioner. Aggrieved by the same, the
petitioner has knocked the door of this Court.
Mr. Mrinal Kanti Roy, learned counsel for the petitioner
vehemently argues that non-payment of gratuity and pension and other post
retirement benefits is contemptuous. Learned counsel for the petitioner
submits that as per the order and direction of this Court, the respondents
should have to pay the admissible dues soon after retirement in view of the
Notification issued by the Chief Secretary of the State. Learned counsel
submits that in the instant case, even initiation of departmental proceeding
was held to be illegal and non est in the eyes of law and the said order was
never challenged by the respondents, which has now attained finality. In
view of the direction of this Court, it was incumbent upon the respondents to
pay the post retirement benefits including the gratuity and pension, as the
petitioner has already superannuated in the year 2018 itself. Learned counsel
further argues that a direction be given to the respondents to pay the entire
amount and heavy cost may be imposed upon them by way of penalty.
Mr. Achyut Keshav, learned counsel for the respondents does
not dispute the contention of the petitioner regarding the order of the Court.
However, learned counsel submits that since no counter affidavit has been
filed, he is not in a position to justify his stand regarding non-payment of
post-retirement benefits.
This Court has already quashed the initiation of departmental
proceeding and the same has never been challenged by the respondents, the
same has attained finality, the petitioner is entitled for post retirement
benefits including gratuity and pension.
In view of the settled law, I hereby direct the respondents to
pay the amount of gratuity and pension as per the entitlement and last pay
drawn by the petitioner and also the other benefits for which he is entitled to,
within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt / production of a copy
of this order. Since the petitioner has superannuated in the year 2018 itself,
the benefit shall carry the statutory interest @ 6 per cent from the date of
retirement till the date of actual payment.
With the aforesaid directions, this writ petition is allowed.
(Dr. S. N. Pathak, J.)
R.Kr.
