Jharkhand High Court
Madhukar Kumar Sinha vs State Of Jharkhand Through The ... on 4 March, 2024
Author: Anubha Rawat Choudhary
Bench: Anubha Rawat Choudhary
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W.P. (S) No. 7481 of 2023
1. Madhukar Kumar Sinha, Age about 61 years, S/o. Jadupati Prasad,
R/o. Flat no. 201, Ramjanam Enclave, Old Bazaar Lane, Near Antu
Chowk, Morabadi, Ranchi, P.O. Ranchi University, P.S. Bariatu,
District Ranchi Jharkhand.
2. Chandra Shekhar Prasad Gupta, Age about 61 years, S/o.
Dhaneshwar Prasad Gupta, R/o. Flat no. 2/B, Block-D. Ashok Niket,
Ramdev Vihar, Ranchi, P.O- Ashok Nagar, P.S. Argora, District
Ranchi. ... ... Petitioners
Versus
1. State of Jharkhand through the Principal Secretary, Road
Construction Department, having its office at Project Bhawan,
Dhurwa, Ranchi, P.O. & P.S. Dhurwa, District- Ranchi.
2. The Principal Secretary, Department of Personnel, Administrative
Reform and Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at
Project Bhawan, Dhurva, Ranchi, P.O. & P.S. Dhurva, District-
Ranchi, ... ... Respondents
---
CORAM :HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY
---
For the Petitioners : Mr. Abhay Prakash, Advocate
: Ms. Ayushi, Advocate
For the Respondents : Mr. Ashish Kumar Shekhar,
A.C. to S.C.(L &C) II
---
03/04.03.2024 Learned counsel for the parties are present.
2. This writ petition has been filed for the following reliefs:-
" a. Particularly a writ of mandamus commanding
upon the respondents to consider the petitioners for
promotion on the post of Executive Engineer from the
post of Assistant Engineer, from the date they are
eligible and grant all consequential benefits forthwith.
b. Further, for issuance of writ of mandamus
commanding upon the respondents to show cause as to
why the juniors to the petitioners were promoted to the
post of Executive Engineer without considering the
case of the petitioners despite the fact that the
Department of Personnel, Administrative Reform and
Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand vide Resolution
issued vide memo no. 2013 dated 10.04.2023 has
already clarified that even the superannuated
government employee are eligible for promotion.
c. In consequent to the above grant of promotion on the
post of Executive Engineer, further prays for
commanding upon the respondents to rectify the
retiral-cum-pensionary benefits and accordingly pay
the accrued arrear thereof and continued thereafter."
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that by virtue of
order passed by this Court in W.P. (S) No. 1390 of 2021(Ashok
Kumar Singh versus State of Jharkhand), W.P. (S) No. 1422 of 2021
(Ram Sagar Tiwari and others vs. State of Jharkhand), W.P. (S) No.
3405 of 2021 (Rashmi Lakra and others versus State of Jharkhand),
W.P. (S) No. 3843 of 2021 (Rajkishore Prasad and others versus State
of Jharkhand) whereby the blanket stay order passed by the state
government regarding promotion was considered and the said writ
petitions were disposed of vide order dated 13.01.2022. As a sequel
to the aforesaid judgment a circular has been issued by the state
government as contained in Annexure-3 bearing memo no. 2013 dated
10.04.2023. The learned counsel submits that although the petitioners
have retired but they are entitled to the relief in terms of the circular.
The learned counsel submits that the petitioners have filed their
representation as contained in Annexure-2 dated 02.05.2023 and one
more representation dated 03.07.2023 was also filed, but no decision
has been taken and therefore the present writ petition has been filed.
4. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents has
opposed the prayer and has submitted that the petitioners have already
attained the age of superannuation and therefore the petitioners are not
entitled for any relief. He has further submitted that no counter
affidavit has been filed in the present case but if the petitioners are
entitled to any benefit arising out of one or the other circular issued by
the state government including annexure-3, the grievance of the
petitioners can be considered by the respondent no. 1.
5. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and
considering the relief as prayed for by the petitioners in this writ
petition, this Court finds that during the course of argument, the
petitioners are claiming relief in terms of Annexure-3 which is state
government decision contained in memo no. 2013 dated 10.04.2023.
6. Since the petitioners are claiming relief as per the circular
issued by the state government, this court is not inclined to call for a
counter affidavit in the present case. The applicability of the circular
of the state government with regard to the petitioners is required to be
examined at the first instance by the respondent no. 1 and certainly in
consultation with respondent no. 2.
7. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of enabling the
petitioners to approach the respondent no. 1 by filing separate
representations with all supporting documents along with the copy of
the writ records and an internet copy of this order within a period of
30 days from today.
8. Upon filing of such representations, the respondent no. 1 is
directed to pass a reasoned order within 6 weeks from the date of
representation after granting an opportunity of hearing to one
representative of the petitioners and taking into consideration the
various decisions of the state government including the decision as
contained in Annexure-3 to the writ petition bearing memo no. 2013
dated 10.04.2023 issued by the Department of Personal
Administrative Reforms and Rajbhasha, Government of Jharkhand as
may be applicable to the petitioners . The reasoned order be
communicated to the petitioners through speed post.
9. It is made clear that this Court has not gone into the merit or
otherwise of the claim of the petitioners and it is for the aforesaid
authority to consider the claim of the petitioners in accordance with
law.
(Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.)
Binit
