Jharkhand High Court
Ashok Kumar Mishra vs The State Of Jharkhand on 29 March, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W.P.(S) No. 4888 of 2019
1. Ashok Kumar Mishra, aged about 62 years, son of late Sukhdeo
Mishra, resident of village - Kaithahi and P.O. & P.S. - Kaithahi,
District - Madhubani, Bihar
2. Suresh Kumar Choudhary, aged about 61 years, son of late
Janardan Choudhary, resident of village Kharajpur and P.O. &
P.S. - Kharajpur, Via- Lahearia Sarai, District - Darbhanga, Bihar
3. Birendra Kumar Giri, aged about 63 years, son of late Gopal
Sharan Giri, resident of Giri Niwas, Bapu Nagar, North Mandiri,
P.O & P.S. Budha Colony, District-Patna, Bihar. (Withdrawn
vide order dated 21.03.2022)
4. Ajay Kumar Choudhary, aged about 63 years, son late Gulab
Chand Prasad, resident of Village Babura, P.O. and P.S.-Bhabhua,
District- Kaimur, Bihar
5. Olga Bani Munzni, aged about 61 years, daughter of late
Mangaldhan Munzni, resident of Mahuatoli, P.O. Mahuatoli, P.S.
Khelgaon, District- Ranchi, Jharkhand
6. Raja Ram Choudhary, aged about 61 years, son of late Bhagelu
Choudhary, resident of village- Maharajganj, P.O. Tilouth, P.S.
Tilouth, District- Rohtas, Bihar. ... ... Petitioners
Versus
1. The State of Jharkhand.
2. The Principal Secretary, Department of Home, Govt. of Jharkhand,
Project Building, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District - Ranchi,
Jharkhand
3. The Principal Secretary, Department of Finance, Govt. of
Jharkhand, Project Building, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District-
Ranchi, Jharkhand.
4. The Joint Secretary, Department of Home, prison and Disaster
Management, Govt. of Jharkhand, Project Building, P.O. and P.S.
Dhurwa, District - Ranchi, Jharkhand
5. The Inspector General of Prison Department of Home, Govt. of
Jharkhand, Project Building, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District-
Ranchi, Jharkhand. ... ... Respondents
---
CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY
---
For the Petitioners : Ms. Chandana Kumari, Advocate
For the Respondents : Mr. Gaurav Abhishek, A.C. to A.G.
---
08/29.03.2022 Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. This writ petition has been filed for the following reliefs:
"That in the instant writ petition, the petitioner prays for
issuance of an appropriate writ(s), order (s) or direction (s),
particularly in the nature of mandamus commanding upon the
respondents to grant following relief (s) to the petitioners;
(a) To pay the arrears of salary from 1.1.2006 to 4.10.2007 in
the pay scale of Rs.15,600-39,100/- in the grade pay of
Rs.6,600/-.
(b) For grant of arrears of salary from October 2007 to
September 2013 in the grade pay of Rs.7,600/- and pay scale of
Rs.15, 600-39,100/-.
(c) For grant of arrears of salary to the petitioners from
October, 2013 till the date of retirement in the grade pay of
Rs.8,700/- Pay Band-IV Pay Scale-34700-67,000/-.
(d) To revise the retirement benefits of the petitioners in the
grade pay of Rs.8,700/- and pay the arrears to the petitioners
till date.
(e) To quash the office order no.2126 dated 23.4.2019
(Annexure -7) whereby, the representation of the petitioners
and others have been rejected, which is absolutely illegal and
without application of mind.
(f) Further to quash the Memo No.2153 dated 24.4.2019
(Annexure - 8) by which, it has been observed that w.e.f.
1.8.2012 the first ACP PB-II, G.P. Rs.5400/-, the second ACP
P.B._III, G.P. Rs. 5400/- and 3rd MACP, P.B. - III, G.P.
Rs.6600/- will be applicable."
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the case of the
petitioners is squarely covered by the Judgment dated
08.02.2021 passed by this Court in L.P.A. No.48 of 2019
whereby the writ petition being W.P.(S). No.1308 of 2017 was
allowed with a direction to the respondents to disburse the
consequential monetary benefits in favour of the writ
petitioners within a period of four months from the date/receipt
of a copy of the order. The learned counsel submits that the
matter in the L.P.A. related to resolution dated 22.01.2013
issued by the Department of Finance with regard to Grade pay
of Rs.6600/- admissible to Principal Probation Officer which as
per the said resolution was granted from 01.08.2012 and not
from 01.01.2006. She submits the Hon'ble Division Bench in
the L.P.A. has held that the recommendation of 6th pay revision
commission was w.e.f. 01.01.2006 by way of policy decision
then in that case, it would be unreasonable on the part of the
respondents while removing the anomaly, to give effect to the
same only from 01.08.2012 as because the recommendation of
the Pay Commission has been accepted by the State
Government with a particular date and all the employee of the
State Government have been extended the benefit and when the
anomaly has been removed, the same has to be given effect
from the date i.e., 01.01.2006.
4. The learned counsel submits that the petitioners herein are
entitled to the same relief and consequently, the pay scales of
the petitioners are required to be revised. Learned counsel for
the petitioners also submits that the petitioners have already
retired and therefore, the pay revision will have a bearing on
their post-retirement benefits as well as they would be entitled
to arrears of pay.
5. The learned counsel for the respondents, on the other hand,
submits that the impugned order in the present case has been
passed prior to passing of the aforesaid judgment in L.P.A. and
therefore, the respondent no.4 may be directed to look into the
grievance of the petitioners taking into consideration the rules,
regulations etc. and also the aforesaid judgment passed in
L.P.A. No.48 of 2019. He also submits that if the petitioners are
entitled to any relief, the same will be granted and
consequential relief will also be granted to the petitioners as per
law.
6. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and
considering the facts and circumstances of this case, this Court
finds that the impugned order as contained in Annexures - 7 and
8 have been passed prior to the aforesaid judgment passed in
L.P.A. No.48 of 2019 disposed of on 08.02.2021. In the light of
the submission made by the learned counsel for the
respondents, this writ petition is disposed of with a liberty to
the petitioners to file a fresh representation before respondent
no.4 within a period of one month from today along with a copy
of this order and a copy of the writ records and also copy of
order dated 08.02.2021 passed in LPA No.48 of 2019. The
respondent no.4 shall pass a reasoned order considering the
rules, regulation, policy etc. and also the aforesaid judgment
passed in L.P.A. No.48 of 2019 after giving an opportunity of
hearing to authorized representative of the petitioners or one of
the petitioners who may be authorized by other petitioners also
and pass a reasoned order within a period of 2 months
thereafter.
7. The reasoned order is directed to be communicated to the
petitioners through speed post at the address to be provided by
the petitioners in their representation. If the petitioners are
found entitled for any monetary benefit arising out of such
reasoned order, the same may also be granted to the petitioners
within a period of 4 months from the date of passing of the
reasoned order.
8. This writ petition is accordingly disposed of.
9. Pending interlocutory application, if any, is closed.
(Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.)
Saurav
