Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2010 DIGILAW 1017 (JHR)

Krishna Kumar Singh v. State of Jharkhand

2010-11-22

J.C.S.RAWAT

body2010
Order The petitioner has filed this writ petition for seeking the following reliefs:- I. For issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari to quash the office order No. 59 dated 27th March, 1993 issued under the signature of the then Director, Fisheries, Government of Bihar, Patna by which the so-called resignation letter of the petitioner has been accepted with effect from 19.12.1992 in utter violation of service laws. II. For issuance of a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents directing them to grant permission for rejoining of the petitioner to the post of Driver under the Office of Assistant Director, Fisheries (Reservoir), Ranchi. III. For issuance of a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to pay all the arrears of salary which has not been paid to the petitioner earlier and to grant consequential financial benefits in fixation 'Of pay of the petitioner treating the period from 19.12.1992 till date of joining as a period spent on duty. . IV. For issuance of a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to pay all the money including salary etc. alongwith statutory interests to the petitioner and other consequential benefits. V. To pass any other relief or reliefs, order or orders, direction or directions to which the Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case for the ends of justice. 2. At the outset, the learned counsel for the petitioner has stated that he is not pressing relief I and II. He is only seeking a relief of mandamus directing to the respondents to pay all the arrears of salary or other benefits which was due before accepting his resignation with interest. 3. In substance the petitioner was working as a Driver in the department of respondent No.2 vide representation dated 15.12.1989, 26.3.1991 and 16.4.1992 represented to the respondents for his transfer again and again from Ranchi to Dhanbad. Ultimately when the representations for transfer is not accepted, he submitted a letter on 19.12.1992 of his resignation from the services to the respondents clearly indicating that if' he is not transferred from Ranchi to Dhanbad, he is tendering his resignation and if his request for transfer is accepted then resignation should not be accepted. 4. The respondents contested the case. 4. The respondents contested the case. It was stated that the petitioner submitted his resignation, however, it is alleged in Paragraph-8 of the counter affidavit that the respondents would consider the demand of arrears due to him for the period when he served in the department before his resignation, as per circulars existing in the department. . , 5. The learned counsel, appearing for the petitioner, submitted that the petitioner joined the services on 16.8.1988 and he remained under the control of the Assistant Director, Fisheries, Ranchi from 1.9.1988. He further submitted that his General Provident was opened as per rules in Form-201. Ha further submitted that till the period of resignation his provident fund is also due and his salary which has not been received was also due and the other monetary benefits which had arisen till the time of his resignation are also due including the fixation of the salary. 6. The learned counsel for the State contended that if any dues against the respondents are due they are ready to pay the said amount. 7. I have gone through the entire records, as the petitioner has not prayed to quash the resignation submitted by him, I am not concerned with the said part of the prayer. The petitioner has only prayed to pay the General Provident Fund, arrears of salary after fixation and provident fund which had accumulated till the date of his submission or the acceptance of his resignation. The respondents-State could not demonstrate that it has denied the fact that all the payments as claimed have been made to the petitioner. The contra to it, the respondents have alleged that they would consider the payments of arrears due to them for the period when he was in service with the. department as per rules. 8. In view of the above, I direct the respondents to consider his claim for the payment of General Provident Fund, arrears of salary after fixation of his pay and the other dues due with the department, expeditiously and preferably within a period of four months from the date of receipt of the order. 9. The said amount, if it is found due, the petitioner shall be entitled to get the interest @ 12% per annum on the said amount after two months from the date of accepting his resignation. 10. The writ petition is disposed of, accordingly. 9. The said amount, if it is found due, the petitioner shall be entitled to get the interest @ 12% per annum on the said amount after two months from the date of accepting his resignation. 10. The writ petition is disposed of, accordingly. No order as to costs.