Disposed

Uday Pratap Singh v. Human Resources Department

Jharkhand HC28 Apr 2015WPC/488/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought financial up-gradation under the A.C.P. scheme. Court disposed of the writ petition allowing it to approach the Director (Secondary Education) via proper channels for decision within 12 weeks.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of; petitioner allowed to approach Director (Secondary Education) via proper channels for decision within 12 weeks.

Uday Pratap Singh Vs Human Resources… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Jharkhand HC (2015)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

W. P. (S) No. 488 of 2015

¶3

Uday Pratap Singh..... Petitioner.

¶4

Versus

¶5

The State of Jharkhand through its Principal Secretary, Human Resources Development Department, Govt. of Jharkhand, Ranchi. 2. The Director (Secondary Education), Human Resources Development Department, Govt. of Jharkhand, Ranchi. 3. The Regional Deputy Director of Education, Palamu Division, Medninagar 4. The District Education Officer, Garhwa......Respondents.

¶6

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE APARESH KUMAR SINGH

¶7

For the Petitioner : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Pandey, Adv. For the Respondents : J. C. to Sr. S. C. II

¶8

2/28.04.2015

¶9

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶10

The petitioner's service as a Clerk in Project Girls' High School, Bhavnathpur, Garhwa has been recognized w.e.f. 1.1.1989 pursuant to notification dated 9th February, 2011 bearing Memo no. 424 issued by Human Resources Development Department, Government of Jharkhand vide Annexure-3. He also seeks financial up-gradation in A.C.P scheme from the due date stating that he has completed more than 26 years from the date of his recognization in his service. He also has represented before Director, Secondary Education vide Annexure-4 for redressal of the aforesaid grievance which however is still not redressed.

¶11

Counsel for Respondent-State submits that instructions are awaited in the matter. However, if the petitioner approaches the respondent no. 2 through proper channel of respondent no. 4, his grievances can be considered in accordance with law and as per A.C.P scheme after due verification of relevant service records.

¶12

Having regard to the aforesaid facts and the submissions made, in a claim relating to financial up-gradation which is to be determined by respondents themselves, in stead of keeping the writ petition pending, without making any comments upon the merits of claim of the petitioner, it is being disposed of by allowing the petitioner to approach the respondent no. 2, Director (Secondary Education), Human Resource Development Department, Government of Jharkhand

¶13

¶14

by way of fresh representation through proper channel of respondent no. 4 duly supported with all necessary facts and documents. On receipt of such representation, the respondent no. 2, Director (Secondary Education), Human Resource Development Department, Government of Jharkhand would consider the same in accordance with law and if required after placing the matter before Screening Committee of the department, take a decision thereupon within a period of 12 weeks. Needless to say that dependent upon such decision, if the claim of the petitioner is found to be admissible, the consequential monetary benefits therefrom be released in his favour without any unreasonable delay thereafter.

¶15

Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of.

¶16

(Aparesh Kumar Singh,J)
jk

Uday Pratap Singh v. Human Resources Department

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Uday Pratap Singh v. Human Resources Department

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Zamiruddin Ansari Vs Ms Central Coalfields Limited Through Its Chairman Cum Managing Director And Ors.

Ram Chandra Prasad Singh Vs Finance

Veena Jha Vs Education

Jaimasih Samad Vs Human Resources Department

Gopal Lal Sharma Vs Jharkhand State Electricity Board Through Its Chairman Cum Managing Director And Ors.

Ram Prasad Handi Vs Bihar State Electricity Board Through Its Chairman And Ors.