Disposed

Awadhesh Kumar Sharma v. the State of Jharkhand Thr the Principal Secretary Higher Technical Education and Skill Development

Jharkhand HC4 Mar 2024WPC/1795/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners sought notional service benefits from 09.12.1986, pay revision and recomputed retiral benefits on par with beneficiaries of earlier writ petitions. Respondents had taken a policy decision vide Memo No. 198 dated 27.02.2024 listing petitioners as beneficiaries. The court disposed of the writ petition, holding no further order was needed if such policy decision existed.

What the court decided

AI extract

Awadhesh Kumar Sharma Vs the State of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Jharkhand HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

W.P.(S) No. 1795 of 2023

¶3

Awadhesh Kumar Sharma, aged about 69 years, son of Late Musafir Sharma, resident of Sindri, P.Ο. & P.S. - Sindri, District - Dhanbad.

¶4

Ghanshyam Sharma, aged about 72 years, son of Late Bishun Sharma, resident of Sindri, P.O. & P.S. - Sindri, District - Dhanbad.

¶5

… … Petitioners

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Jharkhand through the Principal Secretary, Higher, Technical Education & Skill Development Department, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Nepal House, Doranda, P.O. & P.S.Doranda, District - Ranchi.

¶8

The Principal Secretary, Finance Department, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Building, Dhurwa, P.O. & P.S.Dhurwa, District - Ranchi.

¶9

The Director, Higher, Technical Education & Skill Development Department, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Nepal House, Doranda, P.O. & P.S. - Doranda, District - Ranchi.

¶10

The Principal, B.I.T. Sindri, P.O. & P.S. - Sindri, District - Dhanbad.

¶11

The Accountant General, Jharkhand, P.O. & P.S. - Doranda, District - Ranchi. … … Respondents

¶12

… … Respondents

¶13

¶14

CORAM :HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY

¶15

--For the Petitioners : Mr. Rahul Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Abhinay Kumar, AC to GA-I For Accountant General : Mrs. Richa Sanchita, Advocate

¶16

¶17

05 /04.03.2024 Learned counsel for the parties are present.

¶18

2. This writ petition has been filed for the following reliefs:

¶19

“(a) For issuance of direction upon the respondent authorities to extend equitable benefits to the petitioner as has been allowed with respect to the petitioners of W.P.(S) No. 2785/2019 and W.P.(S) No. 6789/2019 in relation to extending the notional benefits of service from 09.12.1986 and for also extending the monetary benefits in terms of the judgment.

¶20

And/Or

¶21

(b) The petitioners consequently pray for revision of the pay scale on account of confirmation of their services w.e.f. 9.12.1986 and to consequently pay the arrears of salary to the Petitioner.

¶22

And/Or

¶23

(c) The petitioners upon revision of the pay scale further pray for a direction upon the respondent authorities to re-compute the entire retiral benefits of the petitioners and to release the same with consequential arrears of difference of pension, gratuity and leave encashment.”

¶24

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the respondents

¶25

have already taken a policy decision in their favour vide decision contained in Memo No. 198 dated 27^th February 2024 and he submits that names of the petitioners are figuring in the list of beneficiaries

¶26

¶27

arising out of the said policy decision and the respondents are only required to act as per their own policy decision.

¶28

4. Learned counsel for the respondents has submitted that a counter-affidavit has been filed in the present case indicating that the petitioners were fence-sitters. However, he submits that if a policy decision has been taken, he has nothing to say.

¶29

5. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, without commenting upon the applicability of the policy decision on the petitioners, this Court is of the view that if a policy decision has been taken in favour of the petitioners as claimed by the petitioners , no further order is required to be passed in the present case.

¶30

6. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of.

¶31

7. Pending interlocutory application, if any, is closed.

¶32

(Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.)

¶33

Pankaj

Awadhesh Kumar Sharma v. the State of Jharkhand Thr the Principal Secretary Higher Technical Education and Skill Development

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Awadhesh Kumar Sharma v. the State of Jharkhand Thr the Principal Secretary Higher Technical Education and Skill Development

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ranju Devi Vs the State of Jharkhand

Yogesh Kumar Das Vs the State of Jharkhand

Munna Sao Alias Munneshwar Sao Vs the State of Jharkhand

MD Ejazul Haque Vs the State of Jharkhand

Govind Hembrom Vs the State of Jharkhand

Gita Kumari Vs the State of Jharkhand