Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2005 DIGILAW 889 (JHR)

Tribhuwan Prasad Sinha v. State Of Jharkhand

2005-12-23

N.N.TIWARI, SUDHANSU JYOTI MUKHOPADHAYA

body2005
JUDGMENT S.J. Mukhopadhaya, J. 1. This appeal has been preferred by the appellant against the order dated 27th June, 2003, passed by the learned Single Judge in WP (S) No. 2980 of 2003, whereby and whereunder, the learned Single Judge dismissed the appeal, affirming the order, contained in Memo No. 238 dated 22nd March, 2003, passed by the respondent Director, Employment and Training, Doranda, Ranchi. By the said order, prayer of the appellant to fix his pension at the rate of Rs. 4707/- per month with effect from 1st February, 1998 was rejected. 2. Before noticing the relevant facts, it may be mentioned that the appellant, having not satisfied with the fixation of pension, had earlier moved before this Court, whereupon the learned Single Judge remitted his case for determination. Thereafter, the 3rd respondent Director, Employment & Training, rejected his claim by the impugned order, contained in Memo No. 238 dated 22nd March, 2003. 3. The main question, which fell for consideration before the authorities, was as to whether the pension of the appellant should have been fixed in the then pay scale of Rs. 880-1510/-. From the admitted facts, it appears that under the respondent State, in its Labour, Employment and Training Department, there were posts of Instructors, having two Grades, The first grade was of Junior Instructor, having lower pay scale of Rs. 335-555/- whereas the second grade (next higher post) was that of Senior Instructor, having pay scale of Rs. 348-600/-. With effect from 1st April, 2003 the pay scale of Junior Instructor was upgraded and the posts were merged with the posts of Senior Instructor vide letter No. 3888 dated 18th December, 1973. However, when the recommendation of the Pay Revision Committee was accepted by Resolution No. 10770 dated 30th December, 1981, two separate scales of pay were provided to Junior Instructors and Senior Instructors. Junior Instructors were provided with lower replaced pay scale of Rs. 730-1080/- whereas Senior Instructors were provided with the replaced pay scale of Rs. 785-1210/-. Those, who were appointed prior to 1st April, 1981 and got the benefits of up-gradation by merger, appear to have been allowed to continue in the replaced pay scale of Rs. 785-1210/-. So far as appellant is concerned, he was appointed as Junior Instructor on 11th July, 1964 and was upgraded to the post of Senior Instructor with effect from 1st April, 1973. 785-1210/-. So far as appellant is concerned, he was appointed as Junior Instructor on 11th July, 1964 and was upgraded to the post of Senior Instructor with effect from 1st April, 1973. After revision of pay, it appears that the appellants pay was not fixex in the replaced pay scale of Rs. 785-1210/- and instead, he was allowed lower pay scale of Rs. 730-1080/-. He, being eligible for 1st Time Bound Promotion with effect from 1st April, 1981, was given 1st Time Bound Promotion with effect from 1st April, 1981, was given 1st Time Bound Promotion in the pay scale of Rs. 785-1210/- and then 2nd Time Bound Promotion. On the basis of such promotions, the replaced scale was provided to the appellant. According to the appellant, alter revision of pay, he was automatically entitled for replaced scale of Rs. 785-1210/-, which was the replaced scale of Senior Instructors, he having been upgraded to the higher post of Senior Instructor prior to 1st April, 1981. If such replaced scale of Rs. 785-1210/- is allowed with effect from 1st April, 1981, for the purposes of 1st Time Bound Promotion, he is entitled for the next higher grade in the pay scale of Rs. 850-1360/- with effect from 1st April, 1981 and consequently, for the purposes of 2nd Time bound Promotion, he is entitled to the next higher grade. 4. On the other hand, according to the respondents, as appears from the impugned order, the appellant was entitled to the pay scale of Rs. 730-1080/- and 1st Time Bound Promotion in the next higher grade of Rs. 785-1210/- and for the purposes of 2nd Time Bound Promotion in the pay scale of Rs. 850-1360/- i.e. the scale in which his pay has been fixed. 5. Admittedly, the appellant retired from the services of the State as far back as on 31st January, 1998. Before his retirement, he was given the replaced scale of pay and also the Time Bound Promotions. After his retirement, the only question, required to be determined, was whether his pension has been properly fixed, in accordance with the statutory Rules i.e. Bihar Pension Rules, 1950. As per the said Rule, the pension is to be fixed as per the formula, taking into consideration the Last Pay Drawn by him. 6. It appears that the appellant was allowed the pay scale of Rs. 880-1510/-(replace scale of Rs. As per the said Rule, the pension is to be fixed as per the formula, taking into consideration the Last Pay Drawn by him. 6. It appears that the appellant was allowed the pay scale of Rs. 880-1510/-(replace scale of Rs. 1640-2900/-) by way of. 2nd Time Bound Promotion with effect from 11th July, 1989 by Directorates order No. 4544 dated 11th December, 1990 and 2064 dated 6th August, 1992. In the said scale of pay he retired on 31st January, 1998 and received a sum of Rs. 3121/- per month. Admittedly, after his retirement pay has been revised with effect from 1st January, 1996 by Resolution No. 3M2-5VE-PU.01/99-660F dated 8th February, 1999. In view of such revision of pay, the appellant deserves re-fixation of his pay as on 31st January, 1998 and consequential revision of pension. The appellant applied for the same but it was rejected. Now the respondents are trying to re- fix the pay scale of the appellant with effect from 1973, by raising a question as to what is the replaced scale, to which he is entitled. This being not permissible after several years of retirement of the appellant, such issue can not be re-opened, Pay of the appellant is to be re-fixed with effect from 1st January, 1996 and on that basis it is to be determined as to what will be the pension of the appellant in such revised scale of pay. The appropriate revision is to be made on the basis of the last salary, drawn by the appellant and the last scale of pay in which such salary was drawn. If the salary was drawn in the replaced scale of Rs. 880-1510/- (revised to Rs. 1640-2900/-) then appropriate revision is to be made accordingly and pension is to be fixed. 7. While doing so, the respondents are also required to see whether similarly situated persons, such as, late Baikunth Singh, Sri Surendra Kumar, Sri. B.P Ambastha, Sri Ramnath Mehta, Sri Ram Naresh Rai, Sri Narmdeshwar Prasad Sinha etc. have been provided similar benefits, as claimed by the appellant, or not. The decision is required to be taken within a period of three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. 8. B.P Ambastha, Sri Ramnath Mehta, Sri Ram Naresh Rai, Sri Narmdeshwar Prasad Sinha etc. have been provided similar benefits, as claimed by the appellant, or not. The decision is required to be taken within a period of three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. 8. For the reasons aforesaid, the order, contained in Memo No. 238 dated 22nd March, 2003, passed by the 3rd respondent/Director, Employment and Training, Doranda, Ranchi as also the impugned order dated 27th June, 2003, passed by the learned Single Judge, are hereby set aside and the appeal is allowed with the aforesaid observations and directions. Narendra Nath Tiwari, J. 9. I agree.