Disposed

Bipin Bihari Mahto and Ors. v. Human Resources Department

Jharkhand HC20 Feb 2018WPC/6478/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Three assistant teachers, appointed on compassionate grounds, challenged the exclusion of their names from a resolution granting Grade-I scales from their joining dates. The court held they are entitled to benefits from their initial appointment. Finding a High Level Committee had already recommended extending benefits to all similar employees, the court directed respondents to pass a final implem

What did the court decide?

Direct respondents to consider petitioners' cases in view of the Committee report; I.A. disposed of.

Bipin Bihari Mahto and Ors. Vs Human… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Jharkhand HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P. (S) No.6478 of 2014

¶2

Bipin Bihari Mahto, Son of Sri Vidya Prasad, Resident of Village: Chowka, P.O. & P.S.: Chowka, District: Seraikela-Kharsawan, presently posted & working as Assistant Teacher, Govt. Upgraded Middle School, Rudia, P.O.: Chainpur, P.S.: Chandil, District: Seraikela-Kharsawan (Jharkhand).

¶3

Md. Akhlaqul Islam, Son of Md. Imdad Husain, Resident of Village + P.O.: Haldi Pokhar, P.S.: Potka, District: East Singhbhum, presently posted & working as Assistant Teacher, Govt. Upgraded Middle School, Rugri, P.O.: Kapali, P.S.: Chandil, District: Seraikella-Kharsawan.

¶4

Sridhar Halder, Son of Sri Kanjilal Halder, Resident of Village: Ichadih, P.O.: Ichadih, P.S.: Ichagarh, District: Seraikella-Kharsawan, presently posted & working as Assistant Teacher, Govt. Upgraded Middle School, Kamargora, P.O.: Kapali, P.S.: Chandil, District: Seraikella-Kharsawan (Jharkhand).

¶5

.... Petitioners

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Jharkhand, through The Secretary, Human Resource Development Department, Govt. of Jharkhand, Ranchi, At: Project Building, Dhurwa, P.O. & P.S.: Dhurwa, District: Ranchi.

¶8

The Director, Primary Education, Human Resource Development Department, Govt. of Jharkhand, Ranchi, At: Project Building, Dhurwa, P.O. & P.S.: Dhurwa, District: Ranchi.

¶9

3.The Deputy Commissioner, Seraikella-Kharsawan, P.O. & P.S.: Seraikella, District: Seraikella-Kharsawan.

¶10

The District Superintendent of Education, Seraikella-Kharsawan, P.O. & P.S.: Seraikella, District: Seraikella-Kharsawan. ....... Respondents

¶11

¶12

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAMATH PATNAIK

¶13

For the Petitioners : Mr. Amit Kr. Tiwari, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Arup Kr. Dey, J.C to G.P.I

¶14

07/20.02.2018 In the instant writ application, the petitioners have interalia prayed for direction upon the respondents to grant of Grade-I scale to the petitioners from their respective date of joining in services and further prayer has been made for grant of subsequent grades including Grade-II & IV to the petitioners after completing 14 to 20 years of service, reckoning the Grade-I

¶15

scale from the date of their joining with all consequential benefits and to count seniority of the petitioners from date of their joining.

¶16

The brief facts as disclosed in the writ application is that all the petitioners are compassionate appointees, appointed as Assistant Teachers in different years, working in different Govt. Schools in the same District of State of Jharkhand. At the time of appointment, all the petitioners were untrained teachers however, they were Graduate. These untrained teachers in view of orders passed by the Hon'ble Patna High Court were sent for training and successfully completed the said training. After acquiring the requisite training, the respondents granted the Grade-I Scale to the petitioners from the date of completion of training. Subsequently, Grade-II scale have been granted to the some of the teachers by reckoning the Grade-I from the date of acquiring of training and not from the date of joining. Aggrieved by the said decision of the State Government, some of them approached this Court in case of Arun Sinha & Ors. Vs. the State of Jharkhnad & Ors . in W.P.(S) No. 638 of 2006 , whereby, it has been held that the petitioner's case should be considered for fixing their seniority from the date of their appointment. They should also be considered for giving benefit of Grade-IV scales after completion of 8/12 years of the services. This observation of the Court was affirmed up to Hon'ble the Apex Court. It is the further case of the petitioners that in view of the observations of the Hon'ble Courts, the petitioners are entitled for grant of Grade-I scale from the date of their joining and thereafter, all subsequent promotions/scales ought have to be given to the petitioners by counting their seniority from the date of their joining in services. Thereafter, the respondents have issued a Resolution bearing No. 3027 dated 14.12.2015 regarding grant of Grade-I scale from the date of joining to the teachers appointed in the year 1987, 1988, 1994 and 2000. But, the name of petitioners who were appointees of years other than as mentioned above, does not find place in the aforesaid Resolution dated 14.12.2015. The petitioners are mainly aggrieved by the non-consideration of their cases for grant of Grade-I scale from the date of their joining and for grant of subsequent grades including Grade-II & IV to the petitioners after completing 14 to 20 years of services as because in the resolution dated 14.12.2015 in Clause-15 (V) of the said notification held that the benefit of Grade-I from the date of joining shall not be given to the teachers appointed on compassionate ground

¶17

and the same will only be given to the persons indicated in sub-clause (i) & (ii) of Clause 15. As the said benefits were not granted to the present petitioners, they approached this Court, by filing this writ petition.

¶18

Learned counsels appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits that the petitioners are entitled for all consequential benefits and promotions from their respective date of joining. Learned counsels further argue that a direction may be given to the respondents for considering the cases of the petitioners within stipulated period. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that the case of the petitioners is squarely covered by the decision as passed in W.P.(S) No.502 of 2016 with analogous cases vide order dated 14.12.2017 by this Hon'ble Court. 4. Mr. Arup Kr. Dey, learned J.C to G.P.I for the respondent-State has also reiterated the submissions made in the counter-affidavit. 5. Be that as it may, having gone through the rival submissions of the parties, this Court is of the considered view that the case of the petitioners needs consideration. Since the law is well settled and now the issue is no more res integra that seniority will be counted from the date of initial appointment and not from the date of completion of training and while considering promotion to Grade-I and to subsequent Grades, the same ratio applies. Therefore, the petitioners are entitled for promotions to Grade-I scale and further to subsequent grades as applicable to individual petitioners with all consequential benefits from the date of their initial appointment. Since the respondents have already taken into consideration the cases of the petitioners in earlier and similar case passed by this Court on 14.12.2017 in W.P.(S) No.502 of 2016 with analogous cases wherein respondents have submitted that “ A High Level Committe vide order dated 25.10.2017 headed by the Joint Secretary of the Department was constituted for reviewing the existing Resolution No.3027 and Committee has submitted its report on 16.11.2017 in which the Committee has recommended that the benefits of Resolution dated 14.12.2015 can be extended to all the petitioners and similar situated employees including the compassionate appointees” no fresh direction is required. After following all the procedures regarding the concurrence of Finance Department and approval of the Cabinet, let a final order be passed for consideration of the cases of petitioners in view of Resolution dated 14.12.2015.

¶19

As a cumulative effect of the aforesaid rules, guidelines and legal propositions, I hereby direct the respondents to consider the cases of the petitioners in view of order dated 14.12.2017 passed by this Court in W.P.(S) No.502 of 2016 with analogous cases.

¶20

With the aforesaid observations, this writ petition stands disposed of.

¶21

Accordingly, I.A. No.288 of 2016 also stands disposed of.

¶22

( Pramath Patnaik, J .)

¶23

RKM

Bipin Bihari Mahto and Ors. v. Human Resources Department

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bipin Bihari Mahto and Ors. 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

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Amit Kumar Singh Vs State of Jharkhand And Ors.

Sunil Kumar Sen Vs M/S Bharat Coking Coal Ltd. And O

Ravindra Nath Sahu Vs State of Jharkhand And Ors.

Mostt.Urmila Devi Vs State of Jharkhand And Ors.

Rubi Kumari Devi Vs State of Jharkhand And Ors.

Shyam Narayan Singh Vs Union of India And Ors.