Disposed

B Kalawati v. Education

Jharkhand HC6 Mar 2019WPC/1518/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition, the petitioner, a Matric Trained Teacher, sought promotion to Grade IV Scale with monetary benefits under the Bihar Taking Over Elementary School Teachers Promotion Rules, 1993. The court directed the petitioner to file a fresh representation with documents and mandated the authorities to process it within twelve weeks.

What did the court decide?

The petitioner was directed to file a representation with documents before Respondent No. 5, and the authorities were directed to process the claim within twelve weeks.

B Kalawati Vs Education — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Jharkhand HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

W.P.(S) No. 1518 of 2017

¶3

----

¶4

B. Kalawati … Petitioner

¶5

-versus-

¶6

The State of Jharkhand through the Secretary, Department of School Education & Literacy, Govt. of Jharkhand, Project Bhawan, H.E.C. Township, P.O. & P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi.

¶7

The Director (Primary Education), Department of School Education & Literacy, Govt. of Jharkhand, Project Bhawan, H.E.C., Township, P.O. & P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi. 3. The Deputy Commissioner-cum-Chairman, District Education Establishment Committee, Jamshedpur, P.O., P.S. Jamshedpur, District East Singhbhum. 4. The Regional Deputy Director of Education, Kolhan, Chaibasa, P.O., P.S. & District Chaibasa. 5. The District Superintendent of Education, Jamshedpur, P.O., P.S. Jamshedpur, District East Singhbhum.

¶8

… Respondents

¶9

----

¶10

CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANDA SEN

¶11

----

¶12

For the Petitioner : Mr. Rahul Kumar, Advocate For the Respondents : A.C. to S.C. (L&C)

¶13

4/ 06.03.2019 Petitioner, in this writ application, has prayed for a direction upon the respondents to consider and promote the petitioner in Grade IV Scale in terms of the Rules framed by the respondents in the year 1993. She prays that her pay scale should also be accordingly modified and she be given the monetary benefits.

¶14

2. Petitioner was appointed as Matric Trained Teacher on 12.03.1987. She graduated from Ranchi University in the year 1994 after taking permission from her employer. Bihar Taking Over Elementary School Teachers Promotion Rules, 1993 were framed by the Government. As per the said rules, teachers are graded from Grade I to Grade VIII. Petitioner claims that by virtue of his length of service and qualification, she is entitled to be paid the salary in Grade IV Scale, which has not been paid to her. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has made representation, but, no action has been taken. He submits that suffice it would be to direct the respondents to dispose of her representation and place her in Grade IV and pay her salary and arrear, which the petitioner is entitled to receive.

¶15

3. Counsel for the respondents submits that though the petitioner claims that she has filed representation before the respondents, but, there

¶16

-: 2 :-

¶17

is no document on record to suggest that the petitioner has filed any representation. Accordingly, it can be presumed that the petitioner has not filed any representation. He submits that if the petitioner files a fresh representation before the respondent No.5, an appropriate order will be passed by him and case of the petitioner will be considered by the authority concerned and an order will be passed in accordance with law.

¶18

4. Considering the submissions of the parties, I am not inclined to call for an affidavit in opposition from the respondents. Petitioner is directed to file a representation annexing all the documents in her favour before the respondent No.5. If such representation is filed by the petitioner, respondent No.5 will consider her case and if required will place the case of the petitioner before the concerned Committee. After consideration of the representation of the petitioner, a reasoned order should be passed. If it is found that the petitioner is entitled to get any benefit, same should be extended to her immediately. If the claim of the petitioner is rejected, reasons thereof should also be communicated to the petitioner. This entire exercise should be completed within 12 (twelve) weeks from the date of receipt of representation made by the petitioner along with a copy of this order.

¶19

5. With the aforesaid observations and directions, this writ application stands disposed of.

¶20

( Ananda Sen, J.)

¶21

Kumar/Cp-02

B Kalawati v. Education

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

B Kalawati v. Education

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Manish Kumar Vs State of Jharkhand

Sushila Devi Vs State Of Jharkhand And Ors.

Hema Devi Vs the State of Jharkhand

Sagar Kumar Vs The State Of Jharkhand Through The Controller Of Examination Staff Selection Commission And Ors.

Ramashish Rai Vs the State of Jharkhand

Kapil Deo Sharma Vs Central Coalfields Limited Through Its Chairman Cum Managing Director And Ors.