The Court disposed of the writ petition regarding pension and pay arrears by directing the petitioner to file a fresh representation before the respondent within eight weeks, mandating a final decision within four months.
Liberty to file fresh representation within eight weeks; directed response and final order within four months.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(S) No. 3119 of 2011
Baleshwar Singh
..… Petitioner
Versus
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN
--------For the Petitioner : Mr. Rajeev Kumar, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Arpan Mishra, Advocate
10/Dated: 29th November, 2021
2. The instant writ application has been preferred by the petitioner for following reliefs:
(a) For, the direction upon the respondents to pay the arrear of dues to the petitioner, arising out of difference of pay of IIIrd, IVth, Vth & VIth Pay Revision after fixing the pay scale (IIIrd P.R.C. w.e.f. 01.10.80 from Rs. 415 to 745, IVth P.R.C. from 730 to 1080, Vth PRC from 1500 to 2750 and VIth P.R.C. w.e.f. 1996 also in the light of the same and to pay the same and it is admitted by the respondents in its letter No. 97 dated 24.01.06, 811 dated 04.04.09 and letter dated 29.05.2010 and 12.08.10 and pay the arrear of the difference since then.
(b) For, the direction upon the respondents to explain before this Hon’ble Court as to why the order & passed in this regards, has not been implemented regarding the payment of gratuity, PF leave encashment etc. and the petitioner, (70 years old) etc. has been forced to enter into litigation for his Legal dues.
-2-
(c) For the payment of arrear of pension after the fixation of pay scale difference with interest and cost.
(d) For any other appropriate relief or, relief (s) as Your Lordships may deem fit and proper in the light of the facts & circumstances of this case.
3. After some argument learned counsel for the petitioner fairly submits that since no counter-affidavit has been filed till date, as such the instant case may be disposed of by giving liberty to this petitioner to file a fresh representation, simultaneously directing the respondent No.3 to consider his representation after verifying the records.
4. Mr. Arpan Mishra, appearing for the respondents submit that in view of non-filling of counter-affidavit, interest of justice would be sufficed by giving liberty to the petitioner to approach the concerned respondents.
5. In view of the limited submission of learned counsel for the parties, the instant writ application is, hereby, disposed of by directing the petitioner to file fresh representation enclosing all the documents raising his claim before the respondent No. 3 within a period of eight weeks. The moment the representation will reach before the respondent No.3, he shall look into the matter and pass a reasoned and speaking order on the representation and any monetary benefit which will accrue pursuant to the passing of the fresh order, the same shall be paid to the petitioner.
- 3-
Since the matter is very old the entire exercise
shall be completed within a period of four months from the date of receipt of such representation.
6. Accordingly, the instant writ application stands disposed of.
(Deepak Roshan, J.)
Amardeep/
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the writ application can be disposed of by directing the petitioner to file a fresh representation due to lack of a counter-affidavit.
What time limit should be imposed for the completion of the entire pension and gratuity claim exercise.
Baleshwar Singh
The Dhanbad Municipal Corporation and others
DEEPAK ROSHAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
