Jharkhand High Court
Umesh Prasad Sah vs The State Of Jharkhand on 30 June, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W.P.(S) No. 3657 of 2019
Umesh Prasad Sah, aged about 61 years, son of Chhakulal Sah,
resident of Anand Kutir Ashram, Kishan Road, Castair Town, P.O.
Deoghar, P.S. Deoghar, District Deoghar, at present residing at 3D,
Pushpa Tower, Radium Road, P.O. G.P.O., Ranchi, P.S. Kotwali,
District Ranchi. ... ... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Jharkhand
2. The Jharkhand State Agriculture Marketing Board, Itki Road,
Hehal, P.O. Hehal, P.S. Sukhdeo Nagar, District Ranchi, through
its Secretary.
3. The Managing Director, Jharkhand State Agriculture Marketing
Board, Itki Road, P.O. Hehal, P.S. Sukhdeo Nagar, District Ranchi.
... ... Respondents
---
CORAM :HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY
---
For the Petitioner : Mr. Prem Prakash, Advocate
For the Resp Nos. 2 & 3 : Dr. Ashok Kumar Singh, Advocate
Mr. Shivam Singh, Advocate
For the Resp.- State : Mr. Vishal Kumar Rai, Advocate
---
06/30.06.2022 Heard Mr. Prem Prakash, learned counsel for the petitioner.
2. Heard Dr. Ashok Kumar Singh, learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the respondent nos. 2 & 3 along with Mr. Shivam Singh,
learned counsel for the respondent nos. 2 & 3.
3. Heard Mr. Vishal Kumar Rai, learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the respondent- State of Jharkhand.
4. This writ petition has been filed for the following reliefs:
"For issuance of an appropriate writ(s)/order(s) and/or
direction(s) commanding upon the respondents and directing
them to grant the benefit of 3rd M.A.C.P. to the petitioner and to
pay the arrear of salary giving the benefit of M.A.C.Ps
consequential benefit with interest. The petitioner has retired
from the office of the Jharkhand State Agriculture Marketing
Board, Work Division, Jamshedpur, on 31.3.2019."
5. A counter-affidavit has been filed in the present case bringing
on record the proceedings of the meeting of the Board of Directors of
respondent no. 2 held on 13.08.2019 wherein it was decided that the
claim of M.A.C.P. will not be payable.
6. The learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon a
judgment passed by Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in L.P.A.
No. 749 of 2019 (T. Hussain Vs. The Jharkhand State Agricultural
Marketing Board and Others) decided on 10.01.2022. He has referred
to paragraph 9 onwards of the said judgement to submit that in similar
writ petition, the counter-affidavit was filed by the respondent relying
upon the decision not to extend the benefit of up-gradation of pay-
scale under ACP/MACP scheme vide resolution dated 13.08.2019, but
the Hon'ble Division Bench rejected the said decision on account of
two reasons as mentioned in para 9 of the said judgement. The learned
counsel submits that consequently the respondent - Board was
directed to disburse the amount of arrears of difference of salary by
virtue of applicable ACP/MACP in favour of the writ petitioner of the
said case within a period of three months from the date of
receipt/production of copy of the said order. The learned counsel
submits that the present case of the petitioner is squarely covered by
the aforesaid judgement and the reliance placed by the respondents on
the decision of the Board vide resolution dated 13.08.2019 (Annexure-
B to the counter-affidavit), is not tenable in the eyes of law.
7. The learned counsel for the respondent nos. 2 and 3, on the
other hand, submits that if the case of the petitioner is squarely
covered by the aforesaid judgement passed in L.P.A. No. 749 of 2019
then appropriate order can be passed by respondent no. 3 upon filing
of a representation by the petitioner.
8. During the course of argument, no point of distinction as such
was pointed out by the learned counsel for the respondents from the
judgement passed in L.P.A. No. 749 of 2019. However, he has
submitted that the matter can be examined by respondent no. 3.
9. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and
considering the facts and circumstances of this case, this Court finds
that the solitary ground which has been taken by the respondents to
deny the relief as prayed for in the writ petition is the record of
proceedings of the meeting of Board of Directors of respondent no. 2
dated 13.08.2019, which decision was subject matter of consideration
by Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court L.P.A. No. 749 of 2019 and
the reliance placed by the respondents on the resolution dated
13.08.2019 was rejected by citing reasons.
10. Accordingly, this Court disposes off this writ petition by
enabling the petitioner to file a fresh representation before the
respondent no. 3 along with the writ records and a copy of the
judgement dated 10.01.2022 passed in L.P.A. No. 749 of 2019 along
with a copy of this order. Upon filing of such representation, the
respondent no. 3 is directed to look into the grievance of the petitioner
in the light of the judgement passed by the Hon'ble Division Bench in
L.P.A. No. 749 of 2019 and pass a reasoned order in accordance with
law.
11. If the petitioner is found entitled to any benefit in terms of the
reasoned order, the same be extended to the petitioner within a period
of one month from the date of the reasoned order. A copy of the
reasoned order be communicated to the petitioner through speed-post
at the address which may be provided by the petitioner in his
representation itself.
(Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.)
Pankaj
