Partly allowed

Awadhesh Kumar And Ors. v. Forest

Jharkhand HC3 Oct 2018WPC/6875/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners sought to enhance superannuation age from 58 to 60 years. Court found Board resolved to recommend this to the State Government but submission was pending. Ordered Corporation to submit recommendation within three weeks and Government to decide within twelve weeks.

What did the court decide?

Direction to JSFDC to submit Board recommendation for age enhancement to State Government within three weeks. Direction to State Government to decide within twelve weeks of receipt.

Awadhesh Kumar And Ors. Vs Forest — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Jharkhand HC (2018)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶3

W.P.(C) No. 6875 of 2017

¶4

Awadhesh Kumar

¶5

Amarnath Singh

¶6

Kumar Rama Kant Rakesh

¶7

Bipin Kumar

¶8

Arvind Kumar

¶9

Ashok Oraon

¶10

… …. Petitioners

¶11

Vs.

¶12

The State of Jharkhand through Chief Secretary, government of Jharkhand, Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, Ranchi

¶13

Secretary, Forest and Environment and Climate Change Department, Government of Jharkhand, Nepal House, Doranda, Ranchi

¶14

Principal Chief Conservator of Forest, Van Bhawan, Doranda, Ranchi

¶15

Jharkhand State Forest Development Corporation through its Managing Director, Road No.5 Ashok Nagar, Argora, Ranchi ….. Respondents

¶16

with

¶17

W.P.(S) No.5961 of 2017

¶18

Om Prakash

¶19

Udit Pal Bhagat

¶20

Bharatendu Kumar

¶21

Abel Hans

¶22

Nelhora Hora

¶23

John Chand Lakra

¶24

Prince

¶25

Birendra Kumar Sinha

¶26

Moti Lal Oraon

¶27

Md. Israrul Haque

¶28

…. Petitioners

¶29

¶30

The State of Jharkhand

¶31

The Secretary, Forest and Environment and Climate Change,

¶32

Department, Government of Jharkhand, Nepal House, Doranda, Ranchi

¶33

Principal Chief Conservator of Forest, Ban Bhawan, Doranda, Ranchi

¶34

The Managing Director, Jharkhand State Forest Development

¶35

Corporation, Ashoknagar, Argora, Ranchi

¶36

…. Respondents

¶37

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DR. S. N. PATHAK

¶38

For Petitioners : Mr. Anil Kumar Sinha, Sr. Advocate Mr. Indrajeet Sinha, Advocate Mr. Saurav Arun, Advocate For Respondents : Mr. L.C. N. Shahedeo, GP-IV

¶39

¶40

Mr. Prem Pujari Roy, AC to GP IV Mr. Amrendra Pradhan, Advocate Mr. Prabhas Kumar, Advocate Mr. Vikas Kishore Prasad, SC (L & C) Mr. Rupesh Singh, Advocate

¶41

07/ 03.10.2018 The petitioners have approached this Court with a prayer for a direction upon the respondents to enhance the age of superannuation of the petitioners from 58 years to 60 years.

¶42

In view of earlier order dated 11.09.2018, passed by this Court, Jharkhand State Forest Development Corporation has come out with a Policy Decision, which has been brought on record by way of supplementary affidavit dated 24.09.2018. From perusal of the same, it transpires that Board of Directors of JSFDC at its 37^th Meeting at ITEM NO.37/23 after discussing the issue of age limit of retirement of JSFDC employees in the light of Hon'ble Supreme Court (Civil Appeal No. 3384/2012) and directions of Hon'ble High Court (in W.P.(S) No. 6875/2017 and W.P.(S) No. 5961/2017), resolved that :-

¶43

“ the Board decided and directed the Managing Director to recommend the State Government to increase the age of superannuation from the present 58 years to 60 years”.

¶44

The Board after discussions passed the following Resolution :-

¶45

“RESOLVED THAT the proposal to increase the superannuation age for the employees of JSFDC be revised to 60 years will be recommended to the State Government and the same to be incorporated in the Service Rules after approval from the Govt. of Jharkhand.

¶46

ITEM NO.37/16 of the aforesaid Minutes reads as follows : Approval of 'Niyamavali' for appointment and promotion of FPO and FPI of the Corporation.

¶47

The Managing Director apprised the Board that Government of Jharkhand vide its letter No. 1265 dated 26.03.2018 has directed JSFDC to submit the 'Niyamavali' after getting the approval of BOD, for both FPO & FPI.

¶48

A copy of 'Niyamavali' was presented before the Board for its approval.

¶49

The Board discussed and recommended that the same be submitted to the State Government for approval.

¶50

Learned counsels for the petitioners submits that nothing has been brought on record to show whether the decision of the Corporation has to be approved by the State Government as already it has been resolved that after approval of the State Government regarding enhancement of the age of superannuation of the employees of the Corporation, the same shall be

¶51

¶52

implemented.

¶53

Learned counsel for the respondents submits that he is not aware that whether the said Resolution of the Board has been sent/ recommended for approval to the State Government. However, it is further argued that as and when the recommendation /Resolutions are received by the State Government, a decision shall be taken for enhancement of the age of the employees of the Corporation, within a period of six weeks.

¶54

From the affidavit dated 24.09.2018, it transpires that Board has already taken a decision for enhancement of the age from 58 years to 60 years, subject to approval of the State Government, but the same has not yet been sent to the State Government. If it has not been sent to the State Government, the same shall be sent, within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Thereafter, upon receiving the recommendation / Resolution, the State Government shall take a decision regarding enhancement of the age of superannuation, within a further period of twelve weeks, in accordance with law.

¶55

With the aforesaid observation, writ petition stands disposed of. As a sequel of the disposal of the aforesaid writ petition, pending I.A.s, if any, also disposed of.

¶56

(Dr. S.N. Pathak, J.)

¶57

punit/

Awadhesh Kumar And Ors. v. Forest

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Awadhesh Kumar And Ors. v. Forest

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

Fulljems Khakha Vs the State of Jharkhand through Principal Secretary Department of Home

Deep Narayan Vs Jharkhand Urja Vikas Nigam Limited through Its Chairman

Ravindra Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand through the Secretary Pr Secretary School Education and Literacy Department

Shambhu Nath Munda And Ors. Vs Education

Om Prakash And Ors. Vs Forest

Dr Birendra Kumar Vs Human Resources Department