Ravindra Kumar vs The State Of Jharkhand Through The ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 2702 Jhar

                                          1



     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                          W.P.(S) No. 4069 of 2020
     Ravindra Kumar                              .... .... Petitioner
                                     Versus
     1.    The State of Jharkhand through the Principal Secretary,
           Department of Transport, Ranchi.
     2.    The Principal Secretary, Department of Finance, Patna (Bihar).
     3.    The Deputy Commissioner, West Singhbhum at Chaibasa.
     4.    The District Accounts Officer, West Singhbhum at Chaibasa.
     5.    The Block Development Officer, Jhinkpani, West Singhbhum at
           Chaibasa.                             .... ...         Respondents
                              ------

CORAM : HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.N. PATHAK

------

     For the Petitioner          :    Mr. Rahul Kumar, Advocate
     For the Respondents         : Ms. Shalini Shahdeo, AC to SC(L&C)-I
                                      Mr. Diwakar Upadhayay, Advocate
                                     -----

6/ 08.08.2023     The petitioner has approached this Court with a prayer for

quashing of the letter dated 24.8.2020 issued by District Account Officer, whereby relying upon Resolution No. 603 dated 19.7.2016, he has held that pay scale of the petitioner shall be fixed treating him to be a newly appointed employee with effect from 24.8.2011 and the benefits of past services would not be extended to him. Further, prayer has been made to treat the petitioner to be absorbed in the service of State of Jharkhand notionally from his initial date of appointment and accordingly grant him continuity in service and allow him the benefits of 5th and 6th pay revision.

2. At the very outset, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the issue has already been set at rest by this Court in W.P.(S) No. 277 of 2018 and other analogous matters, decided on 19.12.2019, whereby, this Court had directed the respondents that the petitioners are entitled for pension taking into consideration the past services rendered by them and the benefits thereof be also extended to them. Learned counsel further submits that the judgment delivered by this Court has been affirmed up-to the Hon'ble Apex Court in Special Leave to Appeal (C) No. 3386 of 2021 and in R.P.(C) No. 785 of 2021. Learned counsel further submits that in view of the aforesaid judgments, the respondents have also issued a Circular contained in Memo No. 61 dated 25.1.2022 extending the benefits to that petitioners. Learned

counsel also points out that the benefits accrued thereto have been extended to several similarly situated persons, but the case of the petitioner has not been considered as yet. Therefore, learned counsel submits that a direction be given to the respondents to consider the case of the present petitioner in the light of the said judgments and circular issued by the Government vide memo no. 61 dated 25.1.2022.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents very fairly admits this position and submits that the case of the petitioner shall also be considered in accordance with law, looking to the aforesaid circular.

4. In view of fair submissions, nothing else is required to be decided in this writ petition, except to issue direction to the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner and extend the benefits as has been given to other similarly situated persons in the light of the aforesaid judgments and thereupon the circular issued by the Government, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

5. With the aforesaid observations and direction, this writ petition stands disposed of.

(Dr. S. N. Pathak, J.) R.Kr.