Dr. Panchanand Jha vs The State Of Jharkhand
2022 Latest Caselaw 1211 Jhar

                IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                          W.P.(S) No. 7385 of 2019

            Dr. Panchanand Jha, (retired associate professor), aged about 65
            years, son of Late Dukhmohan Jha, Resident of Sahibganj, P.O. and
            P.S. Sahibganj, District-Sahibganj, Jharkhand
                                                         ...      ...     Petitioner
                                      Versus
            1. The State of Jharkhand
            2. The Secretary, Department of Higher and Technical Education,
               having its office at Project Building, P.O. Dhurwa, P.S.
               Jagannathpur, District-Ranchi, Jharkhand
            3. The Vice Chancellor, Sidhu Kanhu Murmu University, P.O. and
               P.S. Dumka, District-Dumka Jharkhand
            4. The Registrar, Sidhu Kanhu Murmu University, P.O. and P.S.
               Dumka, District Dumka, Jharkhand ...          ...        Respondents
                                      ---

CORAM :HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY

---

For the Petitioner : Mr. Ashish Kumar Thakur, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Ashish Kumar, Advocate : Mr. Shivam Kumar Singh,

---

7/28.03.2022 Heard Mr. Ashish Kumar Thakur, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner.

2. Heard Mr. Ashish Kumar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent-State.

3. Heard Mr. Shivam Singh, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the University.

4. This writ petition has been filed for the following reliefs:-

(i) For issuance of direction upon the respondents for grant of pay scale of Rs. 12000-420-18300, w.e.f. 01.01.1996 in terms of the judgment passed by this court in W.P. (S) No. 3697 of 2002 dated 19.01.2018.

(ii) Further prayer has been made to recalculate and refix the pay scale of the petitioner in terms of the judgment passed by this Court in W.P. (S) No. 3697 of 2002 dated 19.01.2018 as the actual fixation should have been made in the scale of 12000-420-18300 with effect from 01.01.1996.

(iii) Further prayer has been made for issuance of direction upon the respondents to make payment of the arrears of salary/pension to the petitioner which has occasioned due to wrong fixation of the pay scale, till the date of actual payment

(iv) For issuance of direction upon the respondents to make payment of all the arrears of salary/pension with interest."

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that similarly situated person as that of the petitioner have been granted relief by this court in W.P. (S) No. 3697 of 2002 and the present case of the

petitioner is squarely covered by the said judgment. Learned counsel submits that aforesaid order dated 19.01.2018 in W.P. (S) No. 3697 of 2002 also refers to the earlier judgment passed by this court in W.P. (S) No. 4162 of 2013 dated 20.06.2017.

6. Learned counsel for the State has submitted that the petitioner is seeking a mandamus but before seeking mandamus the petitioner has not approached any of the authorities for redressal of his grievances. He submits that the grievance of the petitioner can be looked into by the respondent no. 2 and if the relief as prayed for by the petitioner is found to be similar as that of other persons as aforesaid, there is no reason that similar benefit will not be extended to the petitioner as well.

7. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this court is of the considered view that no mandamus as prayed for can be issued in the circumstances where the petitioner has not approached the concerned authority for redressal of his grievance. However, this writ petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to raise his grievance before respondent No. 2 by filing a representation along with a copy of this writ record and upon filing of such representation, the respondent No. 2 shall look into the grievance of the petitioner and pass a reasoned order in accordance with law taking into consideration the various policies, rules, circulars and state government decisions etc. and the judgments which may be relied upon by the petitioner or any other judgement(s) and also the plea of the petitioner that similarly situated persons have been extended certain benefits but the petitioner has been denied such relief without any cogent reasons.

8. The reasoned order be communicated to the petitioner within a period of three months from the date of filing of representation at the address to be mentioned in the representation. In case petitioner is found entitled to any relief in terms of money, steps be taken so that the same is also remitted to the petitioner in the bank account whose details be also furnished by the petitioner in the representation itself.

9. This writ petition is accordingly disposed of.

(Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.) Binit