Disposed

Jagannath Yadav v. Human Resource Development

Jharkhand HC3 Feb 2015WPC/389/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition, the petitioner sought salary fixation from his initial appointment date in 1984 instead of 1986. The court disposed of the petition consent and reserved liberty for the parties to proceed before the Director. Respondents were directed to consider the claim within stipulated timelines.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to file representations before Director no.3 within three weeks; Respondent no.3 to decide within four weeks thereafter.

Jagannath Yadav Vs Human Resource… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Jharkhand HC (2015)

¶1

THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

W.P.(S) 389 of 2014

¶3

Jagannath Yadav, S/o Ramdhan Yadav R/o Village Udrangi, Segra Toli PO & PS Bhandara, District Lohardaga

¶4

........... Petitioner

¶5

Vs.

¶6

State of Jharkhand

¶7

Commissioner-cum- Secretary

¶8

Human Resources Development Dept. Ranchi

¶9

Director, Secondary Education Human Resources Development Dept. Ranchi

¶10

Regional Dy. Director of Education,Ranchi

¶11

District Education Officer, Lohardaga

¶12

.......... Respondents

¶13

----------- CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD ----------

¶14

For the petitioner :Mr. S.K.Pandey, Advocate For the Respondents :J.C. to A.A.G.

¶15

¶16

04/Dated: 3rd February, 2015

¶17

Petitioner has approached this Court for direction upon the respondents to fix his salary with effect from his initial date of appointment i.e. from 25.10.1984 instead of 1.4.1986.

¶18

It has been submitted on behalf of petitioner that earlier he had been appointed on 25.10.1984 in Project High School, Mungo by the order of Secretary of the Managing committee. It has further been submitted that services of the petitioner has duly been approved from 14.1.1986 instead of his initial date of appointment i.e. 25.10.1984.

¶19

It has further been submitted that he is entitled to get his salary from 25.10.1984 i.e. initial date of appointment but, the same has not been extended. It has further been submitted that the similar issue has already been decided in C.W.J.C. no. 4007/2000(Annexure-5), the same has been affirmed by the order passed in L.P.A. no. 458 of 2005. But, in spite of several representations made before the concerned authority no response has been given.

¶20

No counter-affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondents however, it has been submitted that if the case of the petitioner is identical to the writ petitioners of C.W.J.C. no.

¶21

¶22

4007/2000 the appropriate order shall be passed in accordance with law.

¶23

In that view of the matter with the consent of the parties instant writ petition is disposed of. Liberty is reserved with the petitioner to file due representation before respondent no.3 i.e. Director, Secondary Education Human Resources Development Department along with supporting documents and judgments passed by this Court within three weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order and respondent no.3 shall take a decision in accordance with law within a period of four weeks thereafter.

¶24

Needless to say if claim of the petitioner is found identical to the writ petitioners of C.W.J.C no. 4007 of 2000 the same relief shall be extended within period aforesaid and if respondent will dispute the claim of the petitioner the reason must be communicated to him by passing a reasoned order within stipulated period.

¶25

(Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.)

¶26

Nibha

Jagannath Yadav v. Human Resource Development

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jagannath Yadav v. Human Resource Development

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vijaya Lakshmi Vs Road Construction

Tilak Dhari Pandey Vs Vinoba Bhave University Through Its Vice Chancellor And Ors.

Atul Prasad Choudhary Vs The State Of Jharkhand And Ors.

Haricharan Prasad Sinha Vs The Steel Authority Of India Limited Through Its Chairman And Ors.

Anugrahit Minj Vs Human Resource Development

Shailendra Kumar Vs The State Of Jharkhand And Ors.