This acting chief justice, acting alone, dismissed a Letters Patent Appeal wherein the appellant, a Laboratory Assistant, sought clarification and higher pay scale as a graduate in science. Finding the appellant was not a science graduate and relying on the lower court, the court rejected the claim.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI L.P.A. No.34 of 2016
Sarita Kumari wife of Dr. Shashidhar Rao, resident of near Semal Tree, S.P. College Road, Dumka, P.O. & P.S. Dumka, District Dumka.
…… Appellant/Petitioner
Versus
……Respondents/Respondents
Coram: HON’BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR
For the Appellant : Absent For the Respondents : Absent
24/Dated 6th April, 2018 Per D. N. Patel. A. C. J.
1. When the matter is called out, learned counsel for the appellant is absent.
Similarly, counsel for the respondent is also absent.
2. Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, it appears that this appellant (original petitioner) is claiming higher pay scale of Rs.50008000/-, instead of pay scale given to him at Rs.4500-7000/-.
3. Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, it appears that this appellant (original petitioner) is working as “Laboratory Assistant” in the Education Department. There are provisions to the effect that if the Laboratory Assistant is graduate in Science, pay scale will be Rs.50008000/-, otherwise, it will be Rs.4500-7000/-. If this law is matched with the present case, it appears that this appellant (original petitioner) is not a Graduate in Science and hence, no error has been committed in giving pay scale of Rs.4500-7000/- to this appellant (original petitioner). This aspect of the matter has been properly appreciated by the learned Single Judge while deciding W.P.(S) No.2890 of 2014 vide order dated 01.12.2015. We see no reason to take any other view than what has been
-2-
taken by the learned Single Judge. Hence, there is no substance in this
Letters Patent Appeal and the same is, therefore, dismissed.
4. In view of the final order passed in L.P.A. No.34 of 2016, I.A. No.686 of
2017 stands disposed of.
(D.N. Patel, A.C.J.)
(Rajesh Kumar, J.)
Ravi-kamlesh/-
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the appellant is entitled to a higher pay scale of Rs.5000-8000/- when not a graduate in science.
Whether the lower court correctly dismissed the claim for higher pay scale.
Sarita Kumari
The State of Jharkhand
The Secretary, Department of Human Resources, Govt. of Jharkhand, Ranchi
The Director, Secondary Education, Department of Human Resources, Govt. of Jharkhand, Ranchi
The District Education Officer, Dumka
D. N. Patel
Rajesh Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
