Disposed

Ganauri Mistry v. the State of Jharkhand through the Secretary School Education and Literacy Department

Jharkhand HC8 Mar 2021WPC/1456/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition, the petitioner sought a direction for the grant of 2nd MACP with retrospective effect. The Single Judge directed the petitioner to file a fresh representation with all credentials before the State Secretary within two weeks, directing a decision within eight weeks.

What did the court decide?

Direction to file fresh representation within two weeks; respondent to pass reasoned order within eight weeks.

Ganauri Mistry Vs the State of Jharkhand… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Jharkhand HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P. (S) No. 1456 of 2020

¶2

------

¶3

Ganauri Mistry, aged about 61 years, son of Ram Sharan Shastri, resident of village Parsawan, P.O. and P.S. Manjhgaon (Lesliganj), District-Palamau

¶4

.... .... …. Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Jharkhand through the Secretary, School Education & Literacy Department, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi

¶7

The Director (Primary Education), School Education & Literacy Department, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi

¶8

The Accountant General, Jharkhand

¶9

.... .... .... Respondents

¶10

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI

¶11

For the Petitioner : Mr. Rahul Kumar , Advocate For the Respondent-State: Mr. Jayant Franklin Toppo, S.C-VII For the Accountant General: Mr. Akashdeep, Advocate

¶12

------

¶13

04/08.03.2021 Heard Mr. Rahul Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Jayant Franklin Toppo, learned counsel for respondent-State and Mr. Akashdeep, learned counsel for the Accountant General.

¶14

This writ petition has been heard through Video Conferencing in view of the guidelines of the High Court taking into account the situation arising due to COVID-19 pandemic. None of the parties have complained about any technical snag of audio-video and with their consent this matter has been heard.

¶15

The petitioner has preferred this writ petition for direction upon the respondents for grant of 2^nd MACP with retrospective due date on completion of the requisite length of service.

¶16

Mr. Rahul Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was appointed on the post of Block Extension Education Officer under Bihar Sub-ordinate Services w.e.f. 04.03.1991. The petitioner was posted at Chainpur, Gumla. The petitioner has been continuously working and serving the respondent-department with utmost sincerity and honesty. The petitioner passed the Hindi Noting Examination in the year, 1992 however, the petitioner could not pass other departmental examinations. The petitioner has been allocated the State of Jharkhand. In the light of Central Government enactment, the State has enacted the provisions for grant of ACP scheme vide Resolution dated 14.08.2002 with respect to financial upgradation to government employee who completes 12/24 years of service. The petitioner has been allowed the benefits of 1^st A.C.P. w.e.f. 16.03.2003. The petitioner was provided promotion in the

¶17

¶18

cadre of State Education Services Class-II (Inspection) vide notification dated 01.07.2009. The petitioner has completed 20 years of service on 16.03.2011.

¶19

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has not been able to pass the rest of the departmental examinations and in view of 1992 Circular, the petitioner was exempted from passing the said examination. He submits that the petitioner has already crossed the age of 50 years. The petitioner has retired on 31.01.2019 and in view of exemption in the light of 1992 Circular, the case of the petitioner is required to be considered as the petitioner has already approached the respondent no. 1.

¶20

Mr. Jayant Franklin Toppo, learned counsel for the respondent-State submits that if the representation is there, the respondent no. 1 will consider the case of the petitioner and pass order.

¶21

In view of the aforesaid facts and considering the submission of the learned counsel for the parties, this writ petition is being disposed of with direction to the petitioner to file fresh representation before the respondent no. 1 with all the credentials within two weeks from today. If such representation is filed within the aforesaid period the respondent no. 1 shall take decision in accordance with rules, regulations and guidelines and pass reasoned order within a period of eight weeks thereafter. It goes without saying that if the decision is taken in favour of the petitioner, the benefit of the same shall be accrued in favour of the petitioner within a period of further six weeks thereafter.

¶22

With the above observations and directions, this writ petition stands disposed of.

¶23

(Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J . )

¶24

Satyarthi/-

Ganauri Mistry v. the State of Jharkhand through the Secretary School Education and Literacy Department

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ganauri Mistry v. the State of Jharkhand through the Secretary School Education and Literacy 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

Mohammad Mustafa Vs the State of Jharkhand

Prakash Bhattacharjee Vs the State of Jharkhand through the Pr Secretary School Education and Literacy Deptt

MD Hasim Khan Vs the Jharkhand Mineral Area Development Authority through Its Managing Director

Ajay Kumar Mandal Vs the State of Jharkhand through the Chief Secretary

Gupteshwar Prasad Vs the State of Jharkhand through the Chief Secretary

Ajit Kumar Verma Vs Excise Department