Brajendra Prasad vs The State Of Jharkhand
2023 Latest Caselaw 1222 Jhar

           IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                        W.P.(S) No. 532 of 2021
                               ----

           Brajendra Prasad.          .                 ......Petitioner
                                          Versus
              1. The State of Jharkhand.

2. The Principal Secretary, Rural Works Department, Govt. of Jharkhand, Ranchi.

....Respondents

----

Coram: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY

--------

For the Petitioner : Mr. Samavesh Bhanj Deo, Advocate For the State : Ms. Soumya S. Pandey, A.C. to AAG-I.

--------

05/20.3.2023 Heard the parties.

In this writ petition, prayer for has been made for quashing of the order as contained in Memo No. 1434 dated 28.9.2020, passed by the respondent no. 2.

The petitioner had earlier moved this Court for redressal of his grievances including of granting benefits of arrears of pension and other legally admissible dues and admissibility of 2nd and 3rd MACP and this Court vide order dated 20.9.2019 had directed the concerned respondents to do the needful in the matter of fixation of pension as the petitioner had already superannuated so that the arrears of pension and other legally admissible dues of the petitioner be paid to him and admissibility of 2nd and 3rd MACP be decided in accordance with law within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

The grievance of the petitioner is that inspite of specific direction of this Court in WPS No. 577 of 2018 the impugned order dated 28.9.2020 has been passed, which does not reflect that the observations of this Court with respect to the payment of admissible dues have been considered by the concerned respondents.

Ms. Soumya S. Pandey, learned A.C. to AAG-1, submits that the matter with respect to the claim of the petitioner has already been settled by this Court in L.P.A. No. 354 of 2018 as a similar order passed in WPS No. 3492 of 2016 was set aside, to which Mr. Samavesh Bhanj Deo, learned counsel for the petitioner has referred to an order passed in L.P.A. No. 287 2014, in which a similar order passed in the writ petition was affirmed in appeal and therefore there has been two conflicting judgments with respect to a similar issue.

Since the impugned order dated 28.9.2020 does not seems to have considered the observations made by this Court in WPS No. 577 of 2018 as it has primarily concentrated on the initiation of a departmental proceeding and the recovery of Rs.3,63,170/- which was quashed by this Court, the matter is

remitted back to the respondent no. 2 to pass a fresh order in accordance with law after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner within a period of six months and in terms of the order passed in WPS No. 577 of 2018 This writ petition stands disposed of with the aforesaid observations.

(Rongon Mukhopadhyay,J) Rakesh/-