Disposed

Eric Rajan Kujur v. State of Jharkhand through Its Chief Secretary

Jharkhand HC18 Jan 2023WPC/4436/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This appeal involves a claim for promotion and grade pay revision in an Industrial Training Institute. Finding the case covered by a prior order, this court disposed of the petition granting liberty for a fresh representation to the director.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to petitioner to file fresh representation within four weeks; respondent to fix hearing date and pass reasoned order within eight weeks.

Eric Rajan Kujur Vs State of Jharkhand… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Jharkhand HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

W.P(S) No. 4436 of 2019

¶3

¶4

Eric Rajan Kujur …. …. Petitioner(s).

¶5

Versus

¶6

State of Jharkhand

¶7

Secretary, Labour Employment & Training Depart. Govt. of Jharkhand, Ranchi

¶8

Secretary, Depart. of Personal Administrative & Rajbhasha, Govt. of Jharkhand, Ranchi

¶9

Director, Labour Employment & Training Depart. Govt. of Jharkhand, Ranchi …. …. Respondent(s)

¶10

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANDA SEN.

¶11

For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Binod Singh, Advocate For the Respondent : Mr. Shishir Suman, Ac to AAG-IV

¶12

6/18.01.2023

¶13

This writ petition has been filed for the following reliefs:

¶14

“(i) For a direction upon the respondents concerned for grant of promotion to the petitioner from the post of Instructor to the post of Principal and Group Instructor under the quota of 25% of degree holders to the post of Principal and Group Instructors in the Industrial Training Institute, since, the petitioner fulfils all the eligibility fixed for the post of Principal under the promotional quota of 25% and the post of Principles are also sanctioned and vacant.

¶15

(ii) For issuance of an appropriate direction to the respondent concerned to fix the initial grade pay of Rs.4600/- instead of Rs.4200/- as directed by the Directorate General of Training, Ministry of Skill Development and Entrepreneurship dated 7th January, 2016 (Annexure – 4, page no.51) with retrospective effect as being given by the State of Uttarakhand. (Annexure –8, page no. 54 to 60).

¶16

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the present case is squarely covered and is on identical footing as that of W.P.(S). No.4394 of 2019 which was disposed of vide order dated 24.03.2022. He submits that same order may be passed in the present case also.

¶17

Learned counsel for the Respondents does not dispute the fact that the present case is covered by the aforesaid order passed by this Court.

¶18

-2-

¶19

Upon perusal of the relief as prayed for in W.P.(S). No.4394 of 2019 which was disposed of vide order dated 24.03.2022 as well as the nature of case, this court also finds that the present case is fit to be disposed of in the same terms.

¶20

After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and considering the nature of relief as prayed for in this writ petition and also considering the fact that the petitioner has raised his grievance repeatedly before the respondent nos. 2 and 4, but as per the writ petition and submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, no order as such has been passed, this writ petition is disposed of with a liberty to the petitioner to approach the respondent no. 4 by filing a fresh representation along with a copy of this order and a copy of the writ petition with its enclosures within a period of four weeks. Upon filing of such representation, the respondent no. 4 shall fix a date of hearing in the matter and pass a reasoned order after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner within a period of eight weeks from the date of filing of the representation. The reasoned order should also be communicated to the petitioner through speed post at the address which may be provided in the representation itself.

¶21

This writ petition is disposed of with the aforesaid observations and directions.

¶22

(ANANDA SEN , J)

¶23

anjali/cp2

Eric Rajan Kujur v. State of Jharkhand through Its Chief Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Eric Rajan Kujur v. State of Jharkhand through Its Chief Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Nisha Kumari Vs the State of Jharkhand

Deepak Kumar Sinha Vs State of Jharkhand through Secretary Department of Rural Development

Anant Kumar Marandi Vs the State of Jharkhand

Pankaj Kumar Lal Vs Union of India Ministry of Home Affairs through Its Principal Secretary

Surender Mirdha Vs the State of Jharkhand

Brajesh Kumar Singh Vs Central Coalfields Limited through Its Chairman Cum Managing Director