Ajeet Kumar vs The State Of Jharkhand Through ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 1159 Jhar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

              W.P. (S) No.4144 of 2020

1. Ajeet Kumar, aged about 41 years, son of Ram Prasad Pandit,
resident of Chandan Nagar (Bhatdiha), Near Durga Mandir, P.O. and
P.S. Godda, District-Godda, Jharkhand
2. Sarwesh Kumar, aged about 27 years, son of Dinesh Chandra
Mandal, resident of village-Meghi Bara, P.O. and P.S. Boarijor, District-
Godda, Jharkhand
3. Bikram Kumar Anand, aged about 23 years, son of Bindeshwari
Paswan, resident of Teachers Training College, Sikatia, P.O. and P.S.
Gumma, District- Godda, Jharkhand
4. Manikant Ram, aged about 33 years, son of Kaladhar Ram, resident
of village Rajoun, P.O. and P.S. Madhura, District-Godda, Jharkhand
                                  .... .... .... Petitioners
                     Versus

1. The State of Jharkhand through Secretary, Department of Human
   Resources Development, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi
2. The Director, Secondary Education, Ministry of Human Resources
   Development, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi
3. The Secretary, Department of Personnel and Administrative Reforms
   and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi
4. The Joint Secretary, Department of Personnel and Administrative
   Reforms and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi
5. Deputy Commissioner-cum-Chairman, District Compassionate
   Committee, Godda
6. District Accounts Officer, Godda
7. The District Education Officer, Godda


CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI

For the Petitioners : Mr. Deepak Kumar Dubey, Advocate
For the Respondent State : Mr. Sanjay Sah, Advocate

4/Dated:-08.03.2021 Heard Mr. Deepak Kumar Dubey, learned counsel for the

petitioner and Mr. Sanjay Sah, learned counsel for the respondent-State.

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.

The petitioners have preferred this writ petition for direction

upon the respondents for the following reliefs:

A. For issuance of an appropriate writ (s), order(s) or direction(s) or

writ in the nature of mandamus commanding upon the Respondent

immediately and forthwith grant pay scale of Rs. 5200-20,200 Grade Pay

@ P.B-I Rs.2400/- instead of Rs. 5200- 20,200 Grade Pay @ P.B-I

Rs.1900/w.e.f, the date appointment of the petitioners on the post of

Clerk on compassionate ground on account of the fact that as per

Government Notification No. 13293 dated 05.10.91 issued by Department

of Personnel and Administrative, Reforms, Patna, Bihar, the pay scale of

Class-3 Post is Rs. 1200-1800 and revised pay scale of Rs. 1200-1800 is

Rs. 4000-6000 Grade Pay @ P.B.-I Rs. 2400/- (In 5th Pay Revision) and

(In 6th pay Revision pay scale is Rs. 5200- 20,200 Grade Pay a P.B.I-

Rs.2400/-) subsequent to that petitioners salary may be fixed in the pay

scale of Rs.5200 20,200 Grade Pay P.BI- Rs. 2400/- w.ef, date of

appointment and to pay all arrear difference of salaries to the petitioners

and for making appropriate amendments the appointment letters of

petitioners in respect of pay scale mentioned therein as Rs. 5200-20,200

Grade Pay @PBI Rs. 1900/- and rectify it as pay scale of Rs. 5200-20,200

Grade Pay a P.B.I- Rs. 2400/-

B. For issuance of an appropriate writ (s), order(s) or direction(s) or

writ in the nature of mandamus commanding upon the Respondents

authorities to grant the pay scale of clerk (class-3 Post) in Rs.1200-1800

and revised pay scale of Rs.1200-1800is Rs. 4000-6000 Grade Pay @ P.B-

1 Rs. 2400/- (In 5th Pay Revision) and (In 6th pay Revision pay scale is

Rs. 5200-20,200 Grade Pay @ P.B.I. Rs. 2400/- in the light of earlier

decision taken by the Secretary, Department of H.R.D., Ranchi vide memo

no. 2028 dated 12.12.2007 for the persons who are appointed on

compassionate ground as per Government Notification No. 13293 dated

05.10.91 issued by Department of Personnel and Administrative, Reforms,

Patna, Bihar and also in view of the different notifications/circulars of the

Respondents concerned and petitioners having been appointed on the

post of clerk on compassionate ground are entitled for pay scale of Rs.

5200- 20,200 Grade Pay @ P.B.I- Rs. 2400/-in 6th pay Revision) instead

of Rs. 5200-20,200 Grade Pay @ P.B-I Rs. 1900/- w.e.f. their date of

appointment on the post of clerk under respondents.

C. For issuance of an appropriate writ (s), order(s) or direction(s) or

writ in the nature of mandamus commanding upon the Respondents

authorities to grant the pay scale of clerk (Class-3 Post) in Rs.1200-1800

and revised pay scale of Rs. 1200-1800 is Rs. 4000-6000 Grade Pay @

P.B.-I Rs. 2400/- (In 5th Pay Revision) and (In 6th pay Revision pay scale

is Rs. 5200-20,200 Grade Pay a P.B.I. Rs. 2400/-) in the light of

judgement passed in W.P. (S) No. 264 of 2014 passed by Hon'ble Mr.

Justice Deepak Roshan on 15.10.2020 and as per the several decisions

passed by the Division Bench of Hon'ble Patna High Court also in the

same and similar issue i.e. for the person who are appointed on the post

of clerk on compassionate ground.

Mr. Deepak Kumar Dubey, learned counsel appearing for the

petitioners submits that the issues involved in this writ petition is squarely

covered in view of the judgment delivered by Patna High Court in L.P.A.

No.167 of 2016 and as such similar direction may be issued to the

respondents to grant similar benefit to these petitioners as has been

granted in L.P.A. No.167 of 2016. It is further contended that several

other writ petitions have been disposed of in view of the decision passed

in L.P.A. No.167 of 2016.

Mr. Sanjay Sah, learned counsel for the respondents-State

submits that the writ petition may be disposed of directing the

respondents to consider the case of the petitioners in the light of the

aforesaid judgment.

In view of above facts and considering the submission made

by learned counsel for the parties, the writ petition is being disposed of

directing the petitioners to file fresh representation before respondent

nos.5 and 7 annexing all the credentials and the judgment on which the

petitioners is relying for such relief including the judgment of co-ordinate

Bench of this Court within a period of three weeks. If such representation

is filed within the aforesaid period, the respondent nos.5 and 7 shall

consider the case of the petitioners in accordance with Rules, Regulations

and Guidelines and considering the judgment relied by the petitioners

within a period of eight weeks further thereafter and will pass the order.

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

petitioners, the benefit of same shall be released in favour of the

petitioners within a period of six weeks further thereafter.

With the above observation and direction, the writ petition is

disposed of.

(Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.)

Satyarthi