Taregana Devi & Ors vs The State Of Jharkhand & Ors
2024 Latest Caselaw 4980 Jhar

Jharkhand High Court

Taregana Devi & Ors vs The State Of Jharkhand & Ors on 7 May, 2024

Author: S.N. Pathak

Bench: S.N.Pathak

                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                                          W.P.(S). No. 1944 of 2015
                                                    ----------

Taregana Devi & Ors. ............ Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand & Ors. ............ Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.N.PATHAK For the Petitioners : Mr. Umesh Pathak, Advocate Mr. Dilip Kr. Prasad, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Ranjan Kumar, AC to Sr. SC-I Mr. Sunil Kumar Agarwal, Advocate

----------

31/ 07.05.2024 Heard the parties.

2. It is specific case of the petitioners that original petitioner superannuated on 31.08.2014 working as a Correspondence Clerk and subsequently on 14.05.2019 he died. Earlier the writ petition was preferred by the deceased father claiming the retiral benefits challenging the reduction order. It is further case of the original petitioner that though he has received the entire benefits after superannuation but the same was paid at reduced rate i.e. basic pay of 14660 + Grade Pay 2800 in place of basic pay 15,370 + Grade Pay 4200. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that admittedly entire benefits have been received by the original petitioner as well as remaining benefits by the legal heirs i.e. daughters but the same has been paid at a reduced rate. The sole contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that when the basic pay was fixed as 19,570/- with grade pay of Rs.4200/- which was also given to the similarly situated persons, there was no occasion to reduce the same on the ground of MACP. The original petitioner was very much entitled for benefits of MACP as he was rightly exempted from appearing in the departmental examination upon crossing the age of 50 years.

3. Let the respondents file a specific affidavit as to why the original petitioner was not entitled for basic pay of 15,370/- with grade pay of Rs.4200/- and even superannuation T.A. has not been extended till date.

The MACP was withdrawn on 10.03.2016 whereas the original petitioner superannuated on 31.08.2014. It has also been submitted that an amount of Rs.29,900/- has been recovered.

4. Let respondents file specific affidavit as to whether they were justified in recovery of the amount after superannuation of the original petitioner from the retiral benefits in view of the celebrated judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of State of Punjab & Ors. Vs. Rafiq Masih (White Washer) & Ors. reported in (2015) 4 SCC 334.

5. Put up this case on 26.06.2024.

(Dr. S.N. Pathak, J.) Rohit/-