Disposed

Janardan Pandey v. Human Resources Department

Jharkhand HC3 Oct 2020WPC/6386/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court disposed of a writ petition seeking pensionary benefits and arrears where the State neither accepted nor rejected the claim. The Court directed the Secretary to consider the claim and pass a reasoned order within eight weeks. The Court refused to decide entitlement at the initial stage due to conflicting submissions.

What did the court decide?

Direction to Secretary to consider petitioner 's claim and pass a reasoned order within eight weeks.

Janardan Pandey Vs Human Resources… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Jharkhand HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

W.P (S) No. 6386 of 2014

¶3

Janardan Pandey …. …. Petitioner(s).

¶4

Versus

¶5

State of Jharkhand

¶6

Director, Primary Education, Govt. of Jharkhand, Project Bhawan, Ranchi

¶7

District Superintendent of Education, Giridih

¶8

Head Master, Primary School, Markodih, Giridih

¶9

The Treasury Officer, Giridih

¶10

The Accountant General, Jharkhand …. …. Respondent(s)

¶11

¶12

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANDA SEN. THROUGH : VIDEO CONFERENCING

¶13

¶14

FOR THE PETITIONER(S) : Mr. Krishna Murari, Advocate

¶15

FOR THE STATE : Mr. O.P Tiwari, G.P -III Mr. Sudharshan Srivastava,A.G ------

¶16

07/03.10.2020

¶17

Heard learned counsel for the parties through video conferencing. The lawyer have no objection with regard to the proceeding, which has been held through video conference today at 11.00 A.M. They have no complaint in respect to the audio and video clarity and quality.

¶18

In this application, petitioner has prayed for following reliefs :-

¶19

a) For sanctions and payment of entire pensionary benefits to the petitioner including the arrears and current pension, gratuity, earned leave and all other admissible benefits to which he is entitled in accordance with pay scale revised, if any, applicable to him

¶20

b) For further direction to pay the differential arrears of salary for the period of suspension with effect from 20.03.2002 to 30.09.2009, when the petitioner stood retired without any proceeding or order of punishment for any wrong/ misconduct to be attributed during period of service.

¶21

c) Further to declare and hold that since no order of punishment either during the service period or after the retirement has been passed for any misconduct, nor the same can be passed in the given facts of the case as there is no pending charge or any wrong committed during the service period; the respondents have no authority or jurisdiction to

¶22

-2-

¶23

withhold any part of pensionary benefits as prayed for in the present application.

¶24

d) Accordingly to pay entire arrears of salary as well as entire pensionary benefits with statutory interest of 5% besides to that of penal interest of 18% for undue harassment and agony caused to the petitioner on account of culpable delay on the part of the respondents in the matter of payment of post retiral benefits leading to irreparable loss and injury.

¶25

From the aforesaid prayer, it is clear that petitioner is seeking for his retiral benefits, arrears and unpaid salary. Petitioner has already represented before the concerned authorities praying therein to release his pensionary and other benefits, which according to him he is entitled to. Neither the authorities have given any acceptance nor passed any order rejecting the claim of the petitioner.

¶26

If the State accepts the claim of the petitioner, the amount which the petitioner is entitled to receive should have to be disbursed by the State and if there is rejection on the part of the State, the State has to come up with a reasoned order stating grounds of rejection. Neither there is acceptance nor rejection in this case. Petitioner has already filed a representation seeking his pensionary benefits. This Court at the initial stage cannot decide as to whether petitioner is entitled for pensionary benefits or not, since there is a rival contention between the parties. State says that petitioner is convicted and his conviction has been upheld and the departmental proceeding is under contemplation and notice has been served, which has been categorically denied by the counsel for the petitioner.

¶27

Considering the rival submissions, I direct the respondent no.1 Secretary Human Resources Development Department, Govt. of Jharkhand to consider the claim of the petitioner and pass a reasoned order on the claim of the petitioner by which he has sought his pensionary benefits. It is made clear that if the petitioner is entitled to get any monetary benefits, the same should be paid and if the authorities comes to a conclusion that petitioner is not entitled for the benefit, a detail reasoned order should be passed by the Secretary and communicate the order soon.

¶28

-3-

¶29

This exercise should be concluded within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt/production of copy of this order along with fresh representation which must be filed by the petitioner.

¶30

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

¶31

(ANANDA SEN , J)

¶32

anjali/ C.P 3

Janardan Pandey v. Human Resources Department

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Janardan Pandey 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Anand Munda Vs the State of Jharkhand

Lugo Alias Sanika Munda Vs the State of Jharkhand

Bhaiya Lal Chauhan Vs the State of Jharkhand

Chandradip Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand

Chandradip Kumar Vs State of Jharkhand

Ratan Lal Mahto Alias Ratan Mahto Vs the State of Jharkhand