Disposed

Vijay Chandra Mandal v. State of Jharkhand And Ors.

Jharkhand HC6 Jul 2019WPC/3811/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In W.P(S) No. 3811 of 2011, the High Court of Jharkhand disposed of a petition by a retired teacher seeking confirmation of promotion and consequential benefits. The court directed the District Superintendent of Education to decide the petitioner's representation within six weeks and deferred the recovery issue.

What did the court decide?

Directed respondent no. 7 to decide the petitioner's representation within six weeks; recovery issue kept open.

Vijay Chandra Mandal Vs State of Jharkhand… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Jharkhand HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

W.P(S) No. 3811 of 2011

¶3

Vijy Chndra Mandal ............................... Petitioner

¶4

Versus

¶5

State of Jharkhand and Ors.

¶6

Respondents --------CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI

¶7

--------- For the Petitioner : Mr. K.K.Ojha Adv. For the State :-Mr. Vishal Kr.Rai A.C to S.C I

¶8

3/Dated:6.07.2019

¶9

Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

¶10

This writ petition has been preferred by the petitioner for direction upon the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner with regard to his promotion from Grade-II to Grade-III teacher in the scale of Rs. 5500-9000 and after promoting him as teacher of Grade-III with effect from 1.4 1986 to pay all the consequential benefits of his promotion of the said grade-III teacher by implementing the seniority list.

¶11

The petitioner had earlier moved before this court by way of filing the writ petition being W.P(S) No. 2206 of 2010 wherein it has been prayed for direction to the respondents to give promotion from Grade III to Grade IV. However the said writ petition was dismissed. learned counsel for the petitioner submits that during pendency of this writ petition, case of the petitioner has been considered for promotion from Grade-II to Grade III teachers in the year 2012 and he has been granted promotion w.e.f 1.4.1998 whereas the petitioner is claiming promotion w.e.f 1.1.1996. .

¶12

Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, this court finds that the petitioner has retired from service on 31.1.2001 and promotion order has not been brought on record.

¶13

In that view of the matter, the petitioner is directed to file representation before the respondent no.7, District Superintendent of Education, Sahebganj who will decide the said representation within six weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.

¶14

-2-

¶15

Mr. Ojha at this stage submits that recovery of the amount in question has been taken place but at present he is not able to provide the date on which date recovery in question was made. There is no prayer in the writ petition, so far as recovery in question is concerned. As such in this writ petition recovery part cannot be decided

¶16

It is made clear that the petitioner if so advised may approach before the appropriate authority for redressal of his grievance so far as the recovery is concerned.

¶17

With the aforesaid observation this writ petition stands disposed of.

¶18

(Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.)

¶19

Vijay Chandra Mandal v. State of Jharkhand And Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vijay Chandra Mandal v. State of Jharkhand And Ors.

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

Sanju Kumar Vs M/S Bharat Coking Coal Limited

Suresh Kumar Vs C.M.D., Steel Authority of Ind

Gosta Bihari Shaw and Ors. Vs Finance

Prem Chandra Sinha Vs the State of Jharkhand and Anr.

MD Aslam Vs Collectariate

Bhagwat Prasad Das Vs State of Jharkhand And Ors.