Dr. Prakash Kumar Verma Vs the State of Jharkhand Thro Secretary Cum Commissioner, Deptt of Higher and Technical Education

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

W.P.(S) No. 5181 of 2024

Dr. Prakash Kumar Verma, aged about 68 years, son of Late Sri K.Ρ. Verma, resident of Mohalla Sadhnapuri, Nand Rani Bagiya, Behind Shirdi Sai Hospital, Bariatu, P.O.- R.M.C.H., P.S. Bariatu, District- Ranchi, PIN834009 … … Petitioner

¶4

Versus

¶5

(1) The State of Jharkhand through Secretary cum Commissioner, Department of Higher and Technical Education, Govt. of Jharkhand, Ranchi having its office at Yojana Bhawan, Nepal House Complex, at and P.O. and P.S. Doranda District Ranchi-834002.

¶6

(2) Director Higher Education, Govt. of Jharkhand, Ranchi having its office at Yojana Bhawan, Nepal House, P.O. and P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi-834002.

¶7

(3) Ranchi University, Ranchi through its Vice-Chancellor, Ranchi University, Ranchi having its office at Main Road, P.O.-G.P.O. Ranchi, P.S. Kotwali, District Ranchi-834001.

¶8

(4) Registrar, Ranchi University, Ranchi having its office at Main Road, P.O.-G.P.O. Ranchi, P.S. Kotwali, District Ranchi.

¶9

(5) Nilambar Pitambar University, Medininagar, Daltonganj Town, Palamau through its Vice-Chancellor at and P.O. Daltonganj G.P.O., P.S. Sadar Medininagar (Daltonganj) District Palamau-822102.

¶10

(6) Registrar, Nilambar Pitambar University, Medininagar, Daltonganj Town, Palamau through its Vice-Chancellor at and P.O. Daltonganj G.P.O., P.S. Sadar, Medinagar (Daltonganj) District Palama-822102.

¶11

(7) Principal, G.LA. College, Daltonganj, Palamau at and P.O. Daltonganj G.P.O., P.S. Sadar, Medinagar (Daltonganj) District Palamau, Jharkhand, PIN-822102 … … Respondents

¶12

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN

¶13

For the Petitioner : Mr. Prabhash Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent(s) : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Tiwari, SC-I

¶14

¶15

Order No. 4/Dated: 23^rd September 2024

¶16

The instant writ application has been preferred by the petitioner for the following reliefs:

¶17

“(A) Rule Nisi for issuance of a writ or a writ of or in the nature of a writ of Mandamus directing and commanding upon Respondents concerned to immediately and forthwith make payment of UGC Arrear/Difference of salary claim accrued in favour of petitioner towards fixation of pay in IVth and Vth pay revision in UGC scale commencing for the period 01.01.1996 to Marh 2000 amounting to Rs. 79,140/- AND Towards arrear claim of D.A. from March, 1990 to

¶18

1

¶19

14^th November, 2000 and w.e.f. 15.11.2000 to February, 2006 amounting to Rs. 1,45,883/- only and therefore, the total claim of arrear amount is Rs. 2,25,023/- only AND To sanction, release and make payment of aforesaid amount in pursuance of fixation of pay in IVth and Vth pay revision scale in the light of Govt. letters and Notification issued by Ranchi University, Ranchi granting promotion to the Petitioner from the post of Lecturer to Reader in the pay scale of Rs. 3000-5000 AND To pay all the lawful and legal admitted dues to the Petitioner alongwith interest @ 12% per annum on all the lawful and legal dues and penal interest for causing acute mental agony, social humiliation and harassment caused to the Petitioner due to nonpayment of lawful and legal dues and cost for this litigation which may be quantified by this Hon'ble court.

¶20

(B) For issuance of a writ/order/direction upon Respondents concerned to explain and lay bare before this Hon'ble Court as to how and under what circumstances the amounts as mentioned for the period as stated above with regard to payment of salary as per IVth and Vth Pay Fixation and arrear of D.A. accrued in favour of Petitioner has not been paid to the Petitioner in spite of specific demand and request made by Petitioner in this regard and to fix up responsibility upon the erring officials and to take up stringent measures against erring officials, for causing inordinate delay in making payment of lawful and legal dues to the Petitioner.

¶21

(C) For issuance of any other appropriate writ/writs be issued order/orders be passed, direction/directions be made as your Lordships may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case and for doing conscionable justice to the Petitioner.”

¶22

At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the instant writ application may be disposed of by directing the concerned respondent to look into the matter and pass an appropriate order, inasmuch as, the petitioner has preferred representation before the respondentauthorities but till date the same has not yet been considered.

¶23

Learned counsel for the respondents submits that since no counter-affidavit has been filed as such the petitioner may be directed to file a fresh representation before the respondent no.2 for redressal of his grievance.

¶24

Having regard to the limited submission made by learned counsel for the parties, the instant writ application is hereby disposed of by directing the respondent no.2 to treat this writ application as representation and take a decision in the matter in accordance with law and applicable rules and regulation by passing a reasoned and speaking order within a period of 16 weeks from the date of receipt/production of copy of this 2

¶25

order. The petitioner would be at liberty to serve a copy of the instant writ application to respondent no.2 as early as possible so that his grievance may be redressed at the earliest.

¶26

It goes without saying that if any amount which would be found payable, shall be paid to the petitioner within a further period of 8 weeks.

¶27

(Deepak Roshan, J.)

¶28

Amit

¶29

AFR/NAFR

¶30

3

Dr. Prakash Kumar Verma v. the State of Jharkhand Thro Secretary Cum Commissioner, Deptt of Higher and Technical Education

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dr. Prakash Kumar Verma v. the State of Jharkhand Thro Secretary Cum Commissioner, Deptt of Higher and Technical Education

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

Tushar Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand through Its Chief Secretary

The Senior Divisional Railway Security Commissioner through Mr Premdeep Sanjay Vs Shamser Anshari

Harendra Kumar Jha Vs the State of Jharkhand

Madhuri Mazumder Vs the State of Jharkhand

Punam Kumari Vs the State of Jharkhand

Kalika Prasad Singh Vs the State of Jharkhand Thro the Pr Secretary, Dept of Higher Technical Education Skill Development