Janki Devi Vs the State of Jharkhand through Its Secretary Transport Deptt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

W.P. (S) No. 3803 of 2023

Janki Devi, aged about 71 years, wife of late Vijay Shankar Singh, resident of Kadma Road Kadma, Near Shiv Mandir, P.O-Kadma, P.S.- Katkamdag, District-Hazaribagh (Jharkhand)

¶4

… … Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Jharkhand through its Secretary Transport Department, Government of Jharkhand, F.F.P Building, Dhurwa, P.O.PS- Dhurwa, District-Ranchi;

¶7

Divisional Manager-cum-District Transport Officer, Ranchi, P.OG.P.O., P.S.-Kotwali, District-Ranchi, Jharkhand

¶8

… … Respondents ---

¶9

CORAM :HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY

¶10

--For the Petitioner : Mr. Raj Kishore Sahu, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Rahul Saboo, G.P. II : Mr. Kunal Chandra Suman, A.C. to G.P. II ---

¶11

05 /15.04.2024 Learned counsel for the parties are present.

¶12

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

¶13

“ a. This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to direct the concerned respondents to grant the petitioner the benefits of arrears of salary of her deceased husband namely, late Vijay Shankar Singh w.e.f. 01-07- 2004 till his retirement dated 31-03-2009, in the light of the Jharkhand Gazette Extra-Ordinary No. 17, dated 2701-2022;

¶14

b. This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to direct the concerned respondents to make payment of arrears of pension to the petitioner for the period between 31-03-2009 to 08-08-2022, i.e. the date of retirement of the petitioner's husband late Vijay Shankar Singh and the date of his death in the light of the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court rendered in order dated 03-03-2023, passed in SLP No.2063620637/2022; “

¶15

This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to direct the concerned respondents to make payment of current pension to the petitioner from the date of death of petitioner's husband till today, and they be also directed to keep on continuing the payment of family pension to her till her death;

¶16

2

¶17

3. Learned counsel for the respondent has referred to the counter affidavit and has submitted that the matter regarding claim of the petitioner has already been processed and the file has been sent to the Finance and Law Department for concurrence and vetting. He has also submitted that a statement has been made at paragraph no. 8 that necessary step is being taken to expedite extending similar benefit to the petitioner in the present case in terms of the resolution contained in memo no. 900 dated 12.08.2023.

¶18

4. At this counsel for the petitioner has referred to order dated 17 February 2024 passed in W.P. (S) No. 5180 of 2015 and submit that similar order may be passed.

¶19

5. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and considering the counter affidavit filed in the present case, it is not in dispute that the petitioner’s husband was an employee of Bihar State Road Transport Corporation and was posted at District Transport Office cum Divisional Manager, Ranchi and superannuated on 31.03.2009 and as per the counter affidavit, admissible retiral dues was already paid to the petitioner’s husband.

¶20

6. It has been stated at paragraph no. 7 of the counter affidavit that claim for regularization w.e.f. 01.07.2004 and for providing admissible retiral dues has been considered and appropriate resolution contained in memo no. 900 dated 12.08.2023 has been issued and the concern file has already been sent to the Finance and Law Department for concurrence and vetting.

¶21

7. Paragraph No. 6 to 10 of the counter affidavit in quoted as under:

¶22

“ 6. That it is humbly stated that petitioner's husband was superannuated on dated 31.03.2009. After the superannuation the petitioner's husband had already paid the admissible retiral dues from the concern office. the on

¶23

7. That it is humbly stated and submitted that the Department of Transport has notified the Resolution contained in Memo No. 900 dated 12.08.2023 for the petitioners of Contempt Case (Civil) No. 356 of 2020 and Contempt Case (Civil) No. 366 of 2020, with regard to the regularization from 01.07.2004 for providing admissible retiral dues. “

¶24

3

¶25

8. That it is humbly stated and submitted that the answering opposite party is taking all necessary steps to expedite extending similar benefits to the petitioners of the instant case.

¶26

9. That it is humbly submitted that the Department of Transport has prepared the cabinet notes for approval of resolution in relation to grant of retiral benefits to the petitioners of instant case and the same has been approved by the departmental Minister.

¶27

10. That it is humbly stated and submitted that the concern file has been already sent to the Finance and Law Department for concurrence and vetting.”

¶28

8. In view of the specific stand taken in the counter affidavit no useful purpose will be served by keeping the present case pending. Respondents are directed to take appropriate decision in connection with the claim of the petitioner within a period of eight weeks from today and the admissible amount, if any, be remitted to the petitioner within a period of two months thereafter.

¶29

9. This writ petition is accordingly disposed of.

¶30

(Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.)

¶31

Binit

Janki Devi v. the State of Jharkhand through Its Secretary Transport Deptt

Case brief

What is this about?

Janki Devi v. the State of Jharkhand through Its Secretary Transport Deptt

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shyama Kant Jha Vs the State of Jharkhand

Dileshwar Nag Vs the State of Jharkhand

Birendra Kumar Mehta Vs the State of Jharkhand

Bhuneshwar Rajwar Vs State of Jharkhand

Chandra Kant Prasad Yadav Vs the State of Jharkhand

Lila Devi Vs the State of Jharkhand through the Principal Secretary School Education and Literacy Deptt