Disposed

Bisni Devi v. State of Jharkhand through Its Secretary Social Welfare Woman and Child Development Dept

Jharkhand HC3 Mar 2021WPC/2478/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition seeking direction to permit petitioner to work as cook under Mid-day Meal Scheme and pay arrear honorarium court directed respondent to file fresh representation petitioner must file fresh representation within two weeks court directed respondent to decide on employment and honorarium within specified timelines

What did the court decide?

Petitioner must file fresh representation before respondent no. 3 within two weeks; respondent to decide employment and honorarium within eight weeks and pay within further six weeks if favorable.

Bisni Devi Vs State of Jharkhand through… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Jharkhand HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P. (S) No. 2478 of 2020

¶2

------

¶3

Bisni Devi, aged about 36 years, wife of Raju Paswan, resident of Azadnagar, Harizantola, P.O. and P.S. Giridih, District-Giridih

¶4

.... .... …. Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

State of Jharkhand through its Secretary, Social Welfare, Woman and Child Development Dept., Ranchi

¶7

Deputy Commissioner, Giridih

¶8

District Superintendent of Education, Giridih

¶9

District Social Welfare Officer, Giridih

¶10

Block Education Extension Officer-cum-Coordinator, Giridih

¶11

Principle-cum-Secretary Utkramit Primary School, Azadnagar, Giridih .... .... .... Respondents

¶12

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI

¶13

For the Petitioner : Mr. Tarun Kumar No. 1, Advocate For the Respondent-State: Mr. Anish Kumar Mishra, Advocate

¶14

-----05/03.03.2021 Heard Mr. Tarun Kumar No.1, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Anish Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for respondent-State.

¶15

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.

¶16

The petitioner has preferred this writ petition for direction upon the respondents to permit the petitioner to work as cook in Utkramit Primary School, Azadnagar, Giridih under the Mid-day Meal Scheme. Further prayer has been made for direction upon the respondents to make payment of arrear of honorarium of 20 months i.e. October, 2017 to June, 2019 of the petitioner.

¶17

Mr. Tarun Kumar No. 1, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was appointed as cook under the Mid-Day Meal Scheme in Utkramit Primary School, Azadnagar, Giridih with the honorarium of Rs. 1000/- per month by approval of Management Committee of said school, whereas Government of Jharkhand is providing additional Rs. 500/- as honorarium to cook-cum helper from the State share effective from 15^th of September, 2015. The petitioner was working properly to the satisfaction of the superiors without any complaint till June, 2019 and used to get her honorarium in her bank account through NEFT till 06.10.2017. He submits

¶18

¶19

that the petitioner has not been informed anything about non-payment of honorarium and she was abruptly stopped to work. He submits that it is well-settled provision of law that if scheme is going on, conduct of the employee is satisfactory, there may not be new incumbent. He submits that the petitioner has not been paid honorarium of 20 months that is why the petitioner represented to the concerned authority, but no decision has been taken as yet.

¶20

Mr. Anish Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the respondent-State submits that this matter has been listed for the first time today and he has got no instruction with regard to dispute.

¶21

In view of the aforesaid facts and considering that the petitioner was working under the Scheme of Mid-Day-Meal as a cook on lesser amount, the writ petition is being disposed of with direction to the petitioner to file fresh representation before respondent no.3 within two weeks from today. If such representation is filed within the aforesaid period the respondent no.3 shall take decision in accordance with rules, regulations, guidelines and considering the fact that the Scheme is still going on and the conduct of the petitioner is satisfactory and will pass a reasoned order within eight weeks thereafter. The respondent no. 3 shall also decide the payment of honorarium due to the petitioner within the aforesaid period. 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/-

Bisni Devi v. State of Jharkhand through Its Secretary Social Welfare Woman and Child Development Dept

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bisni Devi v. State of Jharkhand through Its Secretary Social Welfare Woman and Child Development Dept

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

Anil Kumar Vs State of Jharkhand

D P Sinha Vs Ms Coal India Limited through Its Chairman

Dr Jadav Dutta Vs State of Jharkhand

Yadunandan Turi Vs Jharkhand Mineral Area Development Authority through Its Managing Director

Badal Chandra Layak Vs Jharkhand Mineral Area Development Authority through Its Chairman Cum Managing Director

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