Neera Parmar vs The State Of Jharkhand
2021 Latest Caselaw 844 Jhar

                                            1                   [W.P.(S) No. 57 of 2021]


                IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI
                                 ----

W.P.(S) No. 57 of 2021

----

Neera Parmar, aged about 70 years, wife of Dr. (Prof.) Ranjit Singh, resident of Chutia, PO and PS Chutia, District -Ranchi, Jharkhand ..... Petitioner

-- Versus --

1.The State of Jharkhand, through the Principal Secretary, Higher, Technical Education and Skill Development Department, Govt. of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Building, H.E.C., PO and PS Dhurwa, District Ranchi, Jharkhand

2.The Director, Higher, Technical Education and Skill Development Department, Govt. of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Building, H.E.C., PO and PS Dhurwa, District Ranchi, Jharkhand

3.Ranchi University, Ranchi, through its Registrar, Ranchi University, Ranchi, PO Ranchi University, PS G.P.O., District-Ranchi, Jharkhand

4.The Registrar, Ranchi University, Ranchi, PO Ranchi University, PS-GPO, District-Ranchi, Jharkhand

5.Nirmala College, Doranda, through the Principal, Nirmala College, PO and PS Doranda, District Ranchi, Jharkhand ...... Respondents

----

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI

---

For the Petitioner :- Mr. Rahul Kumar, Advocate For Resp.-State :- Mr. Faisal Allam, AC to SC(Mines)-III For Resp.Nos.3-5 :- Mr. Atul Roy, Advocate

----

03/22.02.2021 Heard Mr. Rahul Kumar, the learned counsel for the

petitioner, Mr. Faisal Allam, the learned counsel for the respondent State

and Mr. Atul Roy, the learned A.C. to Mr. Anoop Kumar Mehta, the learned

counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent nos.3 to 5.

2. This writ petition has been heard through Video

Conferencing in view of the guidelines of the High Court taking into

account the situation arising due to COVID-19 pandemic. None of the

parties have complained about any technical snag of audio-video and

with their consent this matter has been heard.

3. The petitioner has preferred this writ petition for direction

to the respondents to pay equitable relief and retiral benefits including

pension, commutation of pension, provident fund and gratuity to the

petitioner as has been allowed with respect to the Deficit Grant Minority

Colleges in the State of Jharkhand. The prayer for releasing the

consequential benefit to the petitioner is also made in the writ petition.

4. The petitioner was appointed as Lecturer on 01.08.1979 in

the Hindi Department of Nirmala College, Ranchi which is a Minority

Aided College, duly affiliated with Ranchi University, Ranchi. In pursuance

to the letter dated 31.07.1979, the petitioner gave her joining on

01.08.1979 on the post of Lecturer in the Department of Hindi in Nirmala

College, Ranchi. The respondent College as well as Bihar Colleges Service

Commission, Patna has confirmed and approved the services of the

petitioner in the said college as Lecturer in the Department of Hindi. The

petitioner was promoted from the post of Lecturer to the post of Reader

under the 10-years time-bound promotion scheme with effect from

01.08.1979. The said promotion of the petitioner was duly recommended

by the said Commission and approved and notified by the respondent

University. The Governing Body of the respondent Nirmala College in its

meeting held on 25.01.1997 considered the application of the Readers for

promotion to the post of Professor under 16/25 years' promotion scheme

and approved the application of the petitioner for promotion as Professor

w.e.f. 01.08.1995 under 16/25 years' promotion scheme and

subsequently recommended the name of the petitioner to the Screening

Committee of Ranchi University. The Ranchi University upon

recommendation of the case of the petitioner by the Bihar Colleges

Service Commission, Patna vide letter dated 01.05.2000, promoted the

petitioner on the post of Professor in the Hindi Department of the

Nirmala College w.e.f. 01.08.1995. Subsequent thereto, the pay scale of

the petitioner was fixed. The petitioner has also moved before this Court

in W.P.(S) No.971/2006 for fixation of pay scale of the University

Professor which was disposed of. Now the petitioner has superannuated

w.e.f. 31.05.2012. The Government vide resolution dated 19.12.2012

took a decision to pay pension, provident fund and gratuity to the

teachers/non-teachers in the Minority Colleges who had been appointed

prior to 01.12.2004, but the said scheme was to be implemented from

the date of issuance of the resolution dated 19.12.2012. For

implementation of the scheme, a batch of writ petitions were filed before

this Court and out of that batch of writ petitions, one was being W.P.(S)

No.1654/2013. The said writ petition was disposed of by order dated

12.08.2016, directing therein as follows:

"23. On cumulative effect of the facts, reasons and judicial pronouncements, the writ petition is disposed of with direction to the respondents to consider and take a decision afresh, in accordance with law in issuing a corrigendum, so that the notification dated 19.12.2012 shall apply in the same and similar manner with regard to the reaching/non-teaching staffs, who have been appointed on or before 01.12.2004 and retired prior to the issuance of notification dated 19.12.2012, within a period of sixteen weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order."

5. Mr. Rahul Kumar, the learned counsel appearing for the

petitioner submits that the writ petition being W.P.(S) No.1654 of 2013

and analogous cases had been disposed of however the petitioner had

been denied the same and further the Division Bench has also dismissed

the LPAs of the State. He further submits that the Division Bench has

further clarified the matter and ordered that the order is being passed in

the nature of judgment in-rem for all the superannuated teaching and

non-teaching staff of the affiliated minority colleges in the State,

appointed on or before 01.12.2004 and retired from the service before

the cut-off date, i.e. 19.12.2012. In the LPA No.560/2017 and analogous

cases, this observation is made in para-7 of the said judgment. He

submits that pursuant thereto the benefit of the same has been provided

to many of the retired teachers, however, the petitioner has been left

out. He further submits that the matter has already been set at rest and

travelled upto the Hon'ble Supreme Court and in the contempt

proceeding the State has already paid 50% arrear of the petitioners of

that case.

6. Mr. Faisal Allam, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of

the respondent State and Mr. Atul Roy, the learned counsel appearing on

behalf of the respondent nos.3 to 5 are in agreement of the submission

of Mr. Rahul Kumar, the learned counsel.

7. In view of the above facts and considering the judgment of

the co-ordinate Bench as well as of the Division Bench, the writ petition

is being disposed of directing the petitioner to approach the respondent

no.2 by way of filing a fresh representation along with all the credentials

including the judgments on which the petitioner is relying within two

weeks.

8. If such a representation is filed within the aforesaid period,

the respondent no.2 shall take a final call on the said representation of

the petitioner and will pass appropriate reasoned order in light of the

judgment rendered by this Court in the earlier round of litigation (supra)

and will pass a reasoned order within a period of eight weeks since the

matter has been set at rest in view of the fact that the matter travelled

upto the Supreme Court and in contempt respondent State has complied

the order for petitioners of the cases noted above, the case of the

petitioner is required to be considered at par.

9. It goes without saying that if the decision is taken in favour

of the petitioner and the case of the petitioner is covered in the light of

the judgment as noted (supra), the benefit of the same shall be provided

to the petitioner within six weeks further thereafter.

10. With the above observation and direction, the writ petition

stands disposed of.

( Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.)

SI/,