Allowed

Santosh Kumar v. Welfare

Jharkhand HC7 Mar 2024WPC/1016/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought absorption as Clerk-Typist and pensionary benefits for service in a cooperative society. Court found the issue already decided in Md. Akhtar Ansari and Birendra Kumar Sharma and directed the respondent Secretary to verify facts and extend identical benefits if similar.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent No.2 to verify factual similarity with Md. Akhtar Ansari and Birendra Kumar Sharma cases, decide petitioner's representation within four months and grant consequential benefits

Santosh Kumar Vs Welfare — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Jharkhand HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(S) No. 1016 of 2016 with

¶3

I.A. No. 11352 of 2023 Santosh Kumar …. …. Petitioner

¶4

Versus

¶5

1. The State of Jharkhand

¶6

The Secretary, Social Welfare, Woman and Child Development Department, Govt. of Jharkhand, Ranchi.

¶7

The Deputy Secretary, Social Welfare, Woman and Child Development Department, Govt. of Jharkhand, Ranchi.

¶8

The Principal Secretary, Personnel, Administrative Reforms & Rajbhasha Department, Govt. of Jharkhand, Ranchi.

¶9

The Principal Secretary, Finance Department, Govt. of Jharkhand, Ranchi.

¶10

The Director, Social Welfare Directorate, Women, Children & Social Security Department, Govt. of Jharkhand, Ranchi.

¶11

The Assistant Director, Provident Fund Directorate, Finance Department, Govt. of Jharkhand, Ranchi.

¶12

The District Provident Fund Officer, Ramgarh.

¶13

…. …. Respondents

¶14

¶15

CORAM : HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE S.N. PATHAK

¶16

-----For the Petitioner : Mr. Vikash Kumar, Advocate Mr. Mastar Akash, Advocate For the Respondent-State : Ms. Shilpi, AC to SC(M)-II -----

¶17

13 / 07.03.2024 The petitioner has approached this Court with a prayer for a direction upon the respondents to absorb him to the post of Clerk-Typist with effect from the date of joining in the Chhotangpur Regional Handloom Weaver Cooperative Society, Erba, Ranchi or with effect from the date of deputation in Social Welfare Department and to count the service rendered by the petitioner in the Cooperative Society for the purpose of pensionery benefits.

¶18

At the very outset, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that similar issue fell for consideration before this Court in the case of Md. Akhtar Ansari Vs. the State of Jharkhand & Ors ., decided in W.P.(S) No. 1484 of 2010, whereby this Court after hearing the parties directed the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for absorption in the light of several judgments passed by this Court in the case of similarly situated persons. Learned counsel further submits that the

¶19

¶20

judgment rendered in the case of Md. Akhtar Ansari ( supra ) has been tested by the respondents upto the Hon’ble Apex Court in S.L.P. (C) Diary No. 24225 of 2023 and finally, the case of Md. Akhtar Ansari has been considered and consequential benefits were also extended to him. Learned counsel also points out that yet another similar matter in the case of Birendra Kumar Sharma fell for consideration before this Court in W.P.(S) No. 5071 of 2013 and in the light of direction given in the said case, similarly situated person Birendra Kumar Sharma was considered and consequential benefits were also extended. Learned counsel submits that the issue involved in this case is same and similar to the aforesaid cases and as such, a direction may be given to the respondents to treat the present petitioner in similar fashion, as that of the aforesaid cases.

¶21

Though no counter affidavit has been filed by the respondents, but Ms. Shilpi, learned counsel representing the respondents very fairly submits that the issue involved in this case has already been decided by this Court and as such, the present petitioner may also be extended the same benefits, as has been given to the petitioners of the aforesaid cases.

¶22

Be that as it may, having gone through the fair submissions of the parties and upon perusal of the records of the case, this Court is of the considered view that the issue involved in this writ petition has already been decided by the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Md. Akhtar Ansari ( supra) and Birendra Kumar Sharma ( supra ). In such circumstances, I hereby direct the respondent No.2 (Secretary, Social Welfare, Women and Child Development Department, Ranchi) to verify the factual aspects/ issues involved in the present writ petition vis-à-vis factual aspects/ issues involved in the case of Md. Akhtar Ansari ( supra) and Birendra Kumar Sharma ( supra ) and if the facts/ issues involved in the present writ petition are found to be similar to the aforementioned cases, the case of the present petitioner shall be guided with the observations and directions made therein.

¶23

Needless to say that the petitioner shall file a detailed representation before the respondent No.2 enclosing the copy of this order along with other documents on which he is relying upon. Upon receipt of the same, the respondents shall pass a reasoned order thereon within a

¶24

¶25

period of four months from the date of receipt of representation and if the petitioner is found entitled for the entire consequential benefits, the same be extended to him within a further period of four weeks thereafter.

¶26

This writ petition stands allowed. The pending intercountry application stands closed.

¶27

(Dr. S. N. Pathak, J.)

¶28

R.Kr.

Santosh Kumar v. Welfare

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Santosh Kumar v. Welfare

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

Sachindra Saran And Anr. Vs State of Jharkhand And Ors.

Baldeo Prasad Gupta Vs the State of Jharkhand Thro the Principal Secretary Human Resource Development Department

Sarita Saw Vs the State of Jharkhand

Mohammad Shahid Vs the State of Jharkhand and Ors.

Chandra Kant Rai Vs Jharkhand State Electricity Bo

Pappu Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand