Disposed

Paresh Chandra Das v. the State of Jharkhand through Its Pr Secretary Higher and Technical Education Deptt

Jharkhand HC5 Mar 2021WPC/260/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of this writ petition regarding the petitioner's claim for salary and pension fixation. It directed the petitioner to approach Kolhan University with a fresh representation, after which the Department will consider the case and pass a reasoned order.

What did the court decide?

Disposed directing petitioner to file fresh representation before Kolhan University within two weeks for the Department to consider the claim.

Paresh Chandra Das Vs the State of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Jharkhand HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P. (S) No.260 of 2021

¶2

------

¶3

Paresh Chandra Das, aged about 63 years, son of Late Saroj Kumar Das, resident of Village Challiyama, P.O. Challiyama, P.S. Nimdih, Chelema, Seraikela Kharsawan, Bamni Chaliyama, Jharkhand

¶4

.... .... …. Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Jharkhand through its Principal Secretary, Higher and Technical Education Department, having its office at Nepal House, Doranda, P.O. and P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi

¶7

The Director, Higher and Technical Education Department, having its office at Nepal House, Doranda, P.O. and P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi

¶8

The Registrar, Kolhan University, P.O. & P.S. Chaibasa, District West Singhbhum .... .... .... Respondents

¶9

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI

¶10

For the Petitioner : Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Advocate For the Respondents-State : Mr. Anil Kumar Singh, A.C. to S.C.V For the Respondent-University: Mr. Akash Deep, Advocate

¶11

------

¶12

03/05.03.2021 Heard Mr. Rajesh Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Anil Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the respondent-State as well as Mr. Akash Deep, learned counsel for respondent no.3-University.

¶13

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.

¶14

The petitioner has preferred this writ petition for direction upon the respondent to fix the salary of the petitioner under 5^th and 6^th revised pay scales w.e.f. 01.01.1996 and 01.01.2006. Further prayer is made for to fix the pension in the revised pay scale under 6^th Pay Revision since 01.01.2006.

¶15

The petitioner was appointed as Peon on ad hoc basis on daily wages under the Singhbhum College Chandil w.e.f. 01.06.1980 itself. The petitioner’s service was regularized against the sanctioned vacant post in terms of order of Hon’ble Supreme Court in Case No.409 of 1991. The name of petitioner figured at serial no.7 in S.B. College, Chandil. The petitioner has been transferred in Ghatshila College, Ghatshila on 29.12.2003. The Ranchi University vide order dated 18.12.2008 implemented the Central Pay Scale w.e.f. 1996 to the employees and for release of monthly expenditure of all the constituent colleges under Ranchi University, Ranchi, the

¶16

¶17

Department of HRD (Higher Education), Government of Jharkhand revised the pay scale of Class IV employees of Ghatshila College, Ghatshila vide order dated 04.06.2010 w.e.f. 01.01.1996 in which pay scale of 21 employees was revised and revision of 23 persons were kept pending. The petitioner has filed representation and the petitioner has retired on 30.11.2017. The Principal of Ghatshil College, Ghatshil has already recommended the case of the petitioner to Kolhan University, Chaibasa on 05.06.2017. The College of petitioner is now under Kolhan University. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the case of the petitioner is fully covered in view of the judgment rendered by Division Bench in L.P.A. No.542 of 2014 dated 08.05.2018 contained in Annexure-10 to the writ petition.

¶18

Mr. Anil Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the respondent-State as well as Mr. Akash Deep, learned counsel for respondent no.3-University jointly submit that the writ petition can be disposed of directing the petitioner to approach the respondent no.3 who will take a decision and will do needful for payment of claim of the petitioner.

¶19

In view of above facts and considering the submission of learned counsel for the parties, the writ petition is being disposed of directing the petitioner to approach respondent no.3 by way of filing fresh representation within a period of two weeks. If such representation is filed within the aforesaid period, the respondent no.2 shall consider the case of the petitioner in accordance with Rules, Regulations and Guidelines and will pass a reasoned order within four weeks. If the decision is taken in favour of the petitioner, the same shall be forwarded to the Government of Jharkhand for the needful within a period of two weeks further thereafter.

¶20

With the above observation and direction, the writ petition is disposed of.

¶21

(Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J . )

¶22

Anit

Paresh Chandra Das v. the State of Jharkhand through Its Pr Secretary Higher and Technical Education Deptt

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Paresh Chandra Das v. the State of Jharkhand through Its Pr Secretary Higher and Technical Education Deptt

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

Siddhant Dilip Jangam Vs Coal India Ltd. Through Its Chairman And Ors.

Brahmeshwar Singh Vs the Union of India

Raj Mohan Prasad Vs the State of Jharkhand

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