Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2002 DIGILAW 862 (JHR)

Sudhir Chandra Kunwar v. State of Bihar

2002-08-13

TAPEN SEN

body2002
Judgment Tapen Sen. J.-Heard the parties. 2. Admittedly the Petitioner acquired the Diploma in Education on 26.8.1992 as is evident from Annexure-3/A of the writ petition. His earlier writ petitions including C.W.J.C. No. 2849/1991 (R) was rejected on 23.03.1992 on the ground that the Petitioner, on that date admittedly was neither a holder of Degree of B.Ed or Diploma in Education or Diploma in Teaching nor did he have two years Senior Training Course on the basis of the prior I.A. and matric qualification. He also did not have the one year (Gahan) Training on the basis of prior I.A. Qualification. Subsequently, as has been stated above, the Petitioner acquired the Diploma in Education on 26.08.1992. 3. The prayer of the writ petitioner now is that he should be given an appropriate scale attached to a B.A. Trained (Diploma-in-Education) w.e.f. the date he acquired the Diploma-in-Education qualification. His other prayer is that there should be a correction in relation to fixation of his pension etc. and that the order• as contained at Annexure-5 giving him the scale of Rs. 730-1080 (BA untrained) should actually be 785-1210 as per scale granted by the Department of Education itself. Accordingly, the Petitioner prays that subsequent to his retirement on 31.10.1993, the Respondents should be directed to correct the scale so that the necessary difference and arrears is paid to him and pension and post retiral dues is, accordingly, revised. 4. If the Petitioner had acquired the Diploma-in-Education qualification on 26.8.1992, then the prayer of the writ Petitioner that he should be granted B.A. trained (Diploma-in-Education) scale w.e.f. the date he acquired the qualification appears to be a reasonable prayer. 5. So far as the other prayer is concerned, i.e. in relation to Annexure-5, it appears that the department allowed him the scale of Rs. 750-1080 (B.A. untrained scale) w.e.f. 01.04.1981. Annexure 5/A shows that the B.A. untrained scale at the relevant lime was Rs. 785-1210. If this be factually correct, then there is no reason why the Respondents should not look in - the grievances of the writ Petitioner afresh. Accordingly, I think it appropriate that in' the facts and circumstances of this case liberty should be given to the Petitioner to file a short representation limiting his prayers in the manner indicated above. If such a prayer is made then the Respondent no. Accordingly, I think it appropriate that in' the facts and circumstances of this case liberty should be given to the Petitioner to file a short representation limiting his prayers in the manner indicated above. If such a prayer is made then the Respondent no. 4 is directed to look into the grievances of the Petitioner, consider the same in accordance with law and pass a reasoned order. If the Respondent no. 4 finds that the Petitioner is entitled to reliefs sought for by him, then necessary orders thereon must be passed within a period of three months from the date of receipt of such representation. 6. With the aforementioned observations and directions this Writ Petition is disposed off.