Allowed

Ganesh Ram v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC5 Sept 2024WPC/7646/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Jharkhand disposed of a writ petition seeking payment of salary difference for periods where the petitioner held subordinate posts substantively but functioned on senior posts on continuous in-charge basis, relying on Chanda Hembrom.

What did the court decide?

Respondent No. 2 directed to look into the matter and pass appropriate order for payment of difference of salary for specified periods and make payment thereof within 16 weeks.

Ganesh Ram Vs the State of Jharkhand — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Jharkhand HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

W.P.(S) No. 7646 of 2023

¶3

Ganesh Ram, aged about 64 years, son of Sri Kali Ram, resident of Osho Enclave, Bariyatu, PO & PS-Bariyatu, District-Ranchi ... … Petitioner

¶4

Versus

¶5

1.The State of Jharkhand

¶6

2.Principal Secretary, Water Resources Department, Government of Jharkhand, Nepal House, PO & PS-Doranda, District-Ranchi 3.Accountant General, Jharkhand, Ranchi, PO-Hinoo, PS-Doranda, District-Ranchi … ... Respondents

¶7

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN

¶8

For the Petitioner : Mr. A. K. Sahani, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Rahul Dev, AC to SC (L & C)-III --------

¶9

Order No. 6 /Dated: 5^th September 2024

¶10

The instant writ application has been preferred by the petitioner praying for a direction upon the respondent-authorities to pay the difference of higher scale of pay between the post of Executive Engineer and Superintending Engineer with effect from 24.07.2007 till 16.09.2009 and between the post of Executive Engineer and Chief Engineer with effect from 17.09.2009 till 26.11.2019 for holding the said higher post on the same scale of pay of Executive Engineer with annual increment and also consequential benefits.

¶11

2. At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the issue involved in this case with regard to payment of difference of salary to be paid to an employee who is working on a junior post on substantive basis but has been posted as in-charge on a senior post with the scale of the substantive post has been decided in W.P.(S) No. 6618 of 2013 titled “Chanda Hembrom v. The State of Jharkhand & Ors.” wherein this Court after dealing several judgments of different Courts has allowed the prayer of the petitioner. Though the respondent-Department therein

¶12

¶13

assailed the order passed by the writ Court before the Division Bench which was dismissed and as a matter of fact the writ Court order was affirmed up till Hon’ble Supreme Court and the said order has already been implemented.

¶14

3. Learned counsel for the respondents does not dispute the aforesaid fact and fairly submits that the issue involved in this case was already decided in the aforesaid case as such the instant case will be decided on the similar line after verification of record.

¶15

4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after going through the documents available on record, it appears that the grievance of this petitioner is that while working as Superintending Engineer from 24.07.2007 till 16.09.2009 he was on substantive post of Executive Engineer and he was being given salary of Executive Engineer and not of Superintending Engineer. Thereafter he was given in-charge of Chief Engineer with effect from 17.09.2009 till 26.11.2019 but he was drawing the salary of an Executive Engineer itself. Further, the in-charge posting was not on ad-hoc basis; rather continuous.

¶16

The issue with regard to payment of difference of salary to an employee posted on a junior post on substantive basis but doing work of superior post on in-charge basis; and the same is not an ad hoc arrangement; rather intended, has been decided in favour of the petitioner in W.P.(S) No. 6618 of 2013 . ( Refer paragraph nos. 6 to 12 ).

¶17

5. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the parties that the said order has been affirmed up till Hon’ble Apex Court. Accordingly, the instant writ application is disposed of by directing the respondent no.2 to look into the matter and pass an appropriate order for payment of difference of salary for the period 24.07.2007 till 16.09.2009 (working as Superintending Engineer on in-charge basis) and for the period 17.09.2009 till 26.11.2019 (working as Chief Engineer on in-charge basis) and make payment thereof.

¶18

The entire exercise shall be completed within a period of 16

¶19

¶20

weeks from the date of receipt/production of copy of this order.

¶21

(Deepak Roshan, J.)

¶22

Amit

¶23

Ganesh Ram v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ganesh Ram v. the State of Jharkhand

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

Birsa Oraon Vs the State of Jharkhand

Kirtibas Puran Vs the State of Jharkhand

Bikash Kunkal Represented through His Natural Guardian Mother Joga Kunkal Vs the State of Jharkhand

Nilam Devi Vs the State of Jharkhand

Bhim Lal Mahto Vs State of Jharkhand

Anil Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand