Allowed¶23

Bindeshwari Poddar v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC5 Aug 2024WPC/4300/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Retired teacher's financial upgradation from due date despite superannuation; second financial upgradation w.e.f. 01.01.1986; third financial upgradation w.e.f. 01.01.1998; revised pay scale Grade II to Grade III and Grade III to Grade IV; GPF arrears 01.07.1971 to 31.03.1976; notional promotion; retrospective grant after retirement; Director Primary Education Jharkhand; Seraikella-Kharsawan; reasoned order within eight weeks; writ petition allowed; Ambuj Nath, J.

What did the court decide?

Second and third financial upgradations to be granted to the petitioner from the dates they became due (01.01.1986 and 01.01.1998), with respondents to pass a reasoned order within eight weeks; pending I.A., if any, disposed of. ¶23

Bindeshwari Poddar Vs the State of Jharkhand — Jharkhand HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶23

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner's second financial upgradation (due 01.01.1986) and third financial upgradation (due 01.01.1998) must be granted from the dates they became due, notwithstanding his superannuation on 28.02.2001, rather than from the prospective dates at which they were ordered. +1 more

¶19

Court's answer

Financial upgradation is granted from the date when it becomes due, and not from the prospective date when it is ordered to be paid.

¶5

Ratio / Principle

Superannuation from service does not extinguish the petitioner's claim for financial upgradation from the date when it became due.

¶5

Key takeaways

Respondent No.2 (Director, Primary Education) acted illegally in rejecting the petitioner's claim on the stated ground that financial upgradation cannot be granted with retrospective effect.ratio¶22
Writ application allowed; respondents directed to grant the second and third financial upgradations from the dates they became due and to pass a reasoned order within eight weeks of receipt/production of a copy of the order.ratio¶23

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

W.P. (S) No. 4300 of 2019 (Jharkhand HC, Ranchi; Ambuj Nath, J.; decision dated 05.08.2024): Petitioner Mohan Kumar, an assistant teacher (appointed 09.04.1963; first financial upgradation 21.09.1970), sought grant of his second financial upgradation (due 01.01.1986) and third financial upgradation (due 01.01.1998) from the dates they became due, alongwith GPF arrears difference (01.07.1971 to 31.03.1976) on notional promotion. Respondent No.2, the Director, Primary Education, had rejected his representation because he had superannuated on 28.02.2001. Holding that financial upgradation runs from the date it becomes due and that superannuation does not extinguish such a claim, the court found the rejection illegal and allowed the writ, directing grant of both upgradations from the due dates and a reasoned order within eight weeks; pending I.A. disposed of.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P. (S) No. 4300 of 2019

¶2

-------

¶3

Mohan Kumar, S/o Late Bindeshwari Poddar, resident of Village Badibalia, P.O & P.S. Balia, District Munger (Bihar), presently resident of Sri Maya Store, Harhargutter, Jagdishpur Road, P.O Harhargutter, P.S Bagbera, District East Singhbhum (Jharkhand) …... …. Petitioner(s)

¶4

Versus

¶5

The State of Jharkhand.

¶6

The Director, Primary Education, School Education and Literacy Deptt., Govt. of Jharkhand, Ranchi, having its office at Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, Ranchi.

¶7

The Deputy Commissioner, Seraikella-Kharsawan, P.O & P.S Seraikella, District Seraikella-Kharsawan.

¶8

The District Superintendent of Education, Seraikella-Kharsawn, P.O & P.S Seraikella, District Seraikella-Kharsawan

¶9

.…. …. Respondent(s)

¶10

¶11

CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AMBUJ NATH

¶12

¶13

For the Petitioner : Mr. Anil Kumar Sinha, Advocate For the Respondent-State : Mr. Binit Chandra, AC to AAG-III

¶14

¶15

15/ Dated 05.08.2024

¶16

Heard the parties.

¶17

In this writ application, the petitioner has claimed that the respondents may be directed to grant of revised pay scale from Grade II to Grade III w.e.f. 01.01.1986 and from Grade III to Grade IV w.e.f. 01.01.1998 alongwith difference of arrears of his GPF amount from 01.07.1971 to 31.03.1976 after he is notionally promoted.

¶18

The petitioner was appointed on the post of Assistant Teacher in the Matric Trained Pay Scale on 09.04.1963 and he was granted first financial upgradation on 21.09.1970. The second financial upgradation was due on 01.01.1986 as per the rules. The petitioner was denied second financial upgradation from 01.01.1986 and third financial upgradation from 01.01.1998. The second financial upgradation and third financial upgradation were granted to the petitioner not from the date when the financial upgradation was due, but from the subsequent date.

¶19

The petitioner has challenged the order granting him second financial upgradation and third financial upgradation from the prospective date. His earlier writ application was disposed of with the direction to the respondent No.2 to pass reasoned order on his representation. However, respondent No.2 the Director, Primary Education, School Education and Literacy Deptt.,

¶20

Govt. of Jharkhand, Ranchi, had rejected the representation on the ground that the second and third financial upgradation cannot be granted with retrospective effect as the petitioner had already superannuated from service on 28.02.2001.

¶21

It is the settled principle of law that the financial upgradation is granted from the date when the same becomes due and not from the prospective date when it is ordered to be paid. The fact that the petitioner had superannuated from service will not extinguish his claim for financial up gradation from the date when it became due.

¶22

The respondent No.2 the Director, Primary Education, School Education and Literacy Deptt., Govt. of Jharkhand, Ranchi, has illegally rejected the claim of the petitioner, stating that the financial up gradation cannot be granted with retrospective effect.

¶23

Accordingly, this writ application is allowed. The respondents are directed to give second financial upgradation and third financial upgradation to the petitioner from the date when it become due and pass the reasoned order within eight weeks from the date of receipt / production of a copy of this order.

¶24

Pending I.A., if any, also stands disposed of.

¶25

(Ambuj Nath, J.)

¶26

BS/-

Bindeshwari Poddar v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bindeshwari Poddar v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shambhu Prasad Lallu Vs State of Jharkhand .

MD Allauddin Alias Ala Uddin Khan Vs the State of Jharkhand

Salman Khan Vs the Union of India through N.C.B.

Sanjay Kumar Vs State of Jharkhand through Secretary Deptt of Higher Technical Education and Skill Development

Rinku Sharan Shrivastava Vs the State of Jharkhand through the Principal Secretary Water Resources Department

Fulan Nath Vs State of Jharkhand

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

Shambhu Prasad  Lallu Vs State of Jharkhand .

MD Allauddin Alias Ala Uddin Khan Vs the State of Jharkhand

Salman Khan Vs the Union of India through N.C.B.

Sanjay Kumar Vs State of Jharkhand through Secretary Deptt of Higher Technical Education and Skill Development

Rinku Sharan Shrivastava Vs the State of Jharkhand through the Principal Secretary Water Resources Department

Fulan Nath Vs State of Jharkhand

Shambhu Prasad Lallu Vs State of Jharkhand .