Disposed

Dr. Nitendra Prasad Sinha v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Patna HC28 Apr 2014CWJC/2699/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Patna High Court disposed of a writ application wherein the petitioner claimed replacement pay scale under the 5th Pay Commission. The court held that facts regarding the grant of second time-bound promotion were conflicting and directed the Principal Secretary of Health to examine the issue and pass a reasoned order within three months of petitioner's representation if fee pending.

What did the court decide?

Direction to Principal Secretary of Health to examine the benefit of second time bound promotion and replacement pay scale within three months of receipt of petitioner's representation with documents.

Dr. Nitendra Prasad Sinha Vs The State Of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Patna HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2699 of 2013

¶2

======================================================

¶3

Dr. Nitendra Prasad Sinha Son Of Late Shyamacharan Sinha Resident Of At Mohalla Punaichak, Ps- Shastrinagar, Town And District- Patna

¶4

.... .... Petitioner/s

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State Of Bihar Through The Principal Secretary, Medical Education And Family Welfare, Department Of Health, Government Of Bihar, Vikash Bhawan, Secretariate, Bailey Road, Patna

¶7

2.The Director In Chief, Health Education And Family Welfare, Department Of Health, Govt. Of Bihar, Vikash Bhawan, Secretariate, Bailey Road, Patna

¶8

The Principal, Patna Dental College And Hospital, Bankipur, Patna

¶9

The Accountant General Bihar, Virchand Patel Path, Patna

¶10

.... .... Respondent/s

¶11

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Bajarangi Lal, Adv For the Respondent/s : Kumar Vishoka Nand AC to GP-28.

¶12

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MIHIR KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER

¶13

2 28-04-2014 Heard learned counsel for the parties as with regard to the following relief prayed in this writ application:-

¶14

"command the respondents to grant replacement pay scale under 5th pay revision commission in respect of non teaching cadre on the basis of undertaking of respondent authorities mentioned in Para 11 of the counter affidavit with effect from 01.01.96 and payment of its arrears from 01.04.1997 as per the state government decision taken by the fitment committee after determination of last pay scale in the aforesaid scale and make consequential differential amount of pension, gratuity, differential amount of leave salary from date of retirement i.e on 31.01.199 till date. And for any other order/orders to which the petitioner is entitled in the facts and circumstances of the case."

¶15

Patna High Court CWJC No.2699 of 2013 (2) dt.28-04-2014

¶16

¶17

Having regard to the very small issue left in the case of the petitioner, this Court would not keep this writ application pending, inasmuch as, all the petitioner wants is that he should be given the replacement pay scale of the pay scale that he was entitled to get on account of grant of second time bound promotion in terms of the pay revision Committee w.e.f 01.01.1996.

¶18

Admittedly, the petitioner had entered in service on 22.01.1970 and therefore, as per the recommendation of the fourth pay revision Committee when he could not earn any promotion he was given time bound promotion w.e.f. 01.04.1981 vide notification dated 15.09.1990. Subsequently, the petitioner retired with the benefit of the first time bound promotion. Such retirement taking place w.e.f 31.01.1999, the salary of the petitioner which was fixed on account of fifth pay revision coming into force w.e.f. 01.01.1996 was only in the pay scale of the first

¶19

Patna High Court CWJC No.2699 of 2013 (2) dt.28-04-2014

¶20

¶21

time bound promotion.

¶22

The petitioner was however subsequently granted the benefit of second time bound promotion by an order dated 01.09.2004. This Court is not aware of the fact as learned counsel for the petitioner has not enclosed any document as with regard to grant of second time bound promotion w.e.f 01.09.2004. Even if the petitioner was granted second time bound promotion that has to be dated back to 22.01.1995 in view of completion of his service of 25 years on that date.

¶23

Therefore, in all, the respondents have to examine as to whether the benefit of second time bound promotion pay scale which could have become admissible to the petitioner w.e.f 22.01.1995 and its replacement pay scale as per the pay revision Committee report coming into force w.e.f. 01.01.1996, if the petitioner has not been given the benefit of second time bound promotion pay scale or the revision

¶24

Patna High Court CWJC No.2699 of 2013 (2) dt.28-04-2014

¶25

¶26

of such pay scale as per the fifth pay revision Committee that only has to be examined by the authorities.

¶27

The petitioner cannot be granted ACP or the benefit of ACP nor he has claimed for this in this writ application. Unfortunately, this aspect of the matter has been kept in confusion both by the petitioner by not producing the relevant documents and also by respondents not answering as to whether the petitioner was granted the benefit of pay scale of the second time bound promotion in view of the order dated 01.09.2004 and whether its consequential pay fixation in the revised pay scale w.e.f 01.01.1996 with payment of financial component from 01.04.1997 was given to the petitioner.

¶28

Thus, this writ application therefore is disposed of with a direction to the Principal Secretary of the Health Department to examine as to whether the petitioner had got the benefit of the order of his second

¶29

Patna High Court CWJC No.2699 of 2013 (2) dt.28-04-2014

¶30

¶31

time bound promotion by way of monetary benefit in terms of higher pay scale and also its revision which came into force w.e.f. 01.01.1996. If the petitioner would file a representation enclosing the documents he would like to rely before the Principal Secretary of the Health Department, the Principal Secretary would pass his reasoned order considering the grievance of the petitioner confined to the extent indicated above within a period of three months from the date of filing of the representation by the petitoner. In other words, the Principal Secretary of the Health Department would also ascertain as to whether the petitioner had got the financial benefit of the second time bound promotion and its replacement pay scale in terms of the fifth pay revision Committee report w.e.f 01.01.1996.

¶32

With the aforementioned observation and

¶33

direction, this application is disposed of.

¶34

(Mihir Kumar Jha, J)

¶35

Ranjan/-

Dr. Nitendra Prasad Sinha v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dr. Nitendra Prasad Sinha v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sunil Kumar Mandal Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Gopi Chandra Thakur Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Sitaram Yadav Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Ram Lochan Singh and Ors. Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Kumud Kumari Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Reena Kumari Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.