Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2010 DIGILAW 371 (JHR)

Kailash Kumar Das v. State of Jharkhand

2010-03-26

D.G.R.PATNAIK

body2010
Order Heard counsel for the parties. 2. The petitioner in this writ application has prayed for a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to revise and fix his pay and other allowances as per the order of his promotion under ACP Scheme as contained in the order dated 14.7.2005 of the Superintending Engineer, Works Circle, REO, Dumka. A further prayer has been made for a direction upon the respondents to revise the pension and other retiral benefits as per the revised pay scale of the petitioner arrived upon revision in accordance with the promotion given to him under the ACP Scheme and commutation of pension thereon and further far a direction far payment of difference amounts of pension and other retiral benefits and arrears thereon arising due to revision of pension and other retiral benefits with statutory and penal interest forthwith. 3. From the admitted facts it appears that the petitioner was pasted as a Draughtsman Grade-II in the office of the Superintending Engineer, REO Circle, Dumka. He retired from service an 31.1.2004 an the past of Senior Draughtsman and, an the date of the retirement, the scale of pay was 4,500-7,000/-. 4. The petitioner's grievance is that despite the orders of the Superintending Engineer vide Memo. No.. 215 dated 14.7.2005, whereby the grant of the benefits of the first and second ACPs has been issued to him, though the petitioner was given the benefit of the first time bound promotion equivalent to the first ACP, but the benefits of the second ACP has not been given to him inasmuch as, the pay scale which aught to have been given to him, can sequent upon the grant of second ACP in the scale of Rs. 5,000-8,000/-, has not been given to him. Learned counsel far the petitioner explains that had the monetary benefits of second ACP been given to the petitioner, then an the date of his superannuation, in consonance with the position of Senior Draughtsman which he was holding, his pay would have been at Rs. 7,650/-. 5,000-8,000/-, has not been given to him. Learned counsel far the petitioner explains that had the monetary benefits of second ACP been given to the petitioner, then an the date of his superannuation, in consonance with the position of Senior Draughtsman which he was holding, his pay would have been at Rs. 7,650/-. The benefits of the second ACP being not given to the petitioner, he was made to retire an a lower pay scale and an a lower salary and the amount of pension and the other retiral benefits have been computed wrongly without including the pay to which the petitioner was entitled upon the grant of the benefits of the second ACP to him. 5. In the counter affidavit of the respondents, a specific stand has been token that the petitioner was granted the first ACP on the scale of Rs. 4,500-125-7,000/- and later, he was granted the benefits of the second ACP on the pay scale of Rs. 5,000-150-8,000/- which was made payable to him with effect from 9.8.1999. The letter of the Superintending Engineer, REO Circle, Dumka dated 12.11.2005 recommending the grant of the ACPs was forwarded to the Commissioner, Santhal Pargana for approval. The approval was given by the Commissioner vide his letter No. 158 dated 18.3.2006. 6. From the above facts as admitted by the respondents, it appears that the petitioner's claim for the benefits of second ACP has not in fact been denied to him. Rather, the same was conceded and has been made effective from 9.8.1999. It appears however that the final approval regarding the grant of ACP benefits was given by the Commissioner on 18.3.2006 and much prior to that date, the petitioner had retired from service. 7. It is apparent therefore that the petitioner was eligible for the financial benefits which would have accrued to him on the basis of the second ACP which was made effective from 9.8.1999 and he would therefore be entitled to the arrears of the difference of pay pursuant to the grant of the benefits of the second ACP. 8. Considering the above facts and circumstances. 8. Considering the above facts and circumstances. this application is disposed of with a direction to the concerned authorities of the respondents to calculate and assess the total amount of arrears of pay which would accrue to the petitioner upon computing the additional financial benefits to which he was entitled upon the grant of benefits of second ACP to him with effect from 15.11.2000, though notionally from 9.8.1999 and upon making such assessment, to revise the amount which the petitioner would have drawn as his last pay on the date of his retirement and to compute the pension accordingly on the basis of such amount of last pay. The assessment of the amount payable to the petitioner in the manner directed above, shall be made within two months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order and the total payable .amount shall be paid to the petitioner within six weeks from the date of decision taken. In the event the amount is not paid within the period stipulated above, the same shall carry interest @ 6% per annum computed from the date after lapse of the period stipulated above, till the date of final payment With these observations, this writ application is disposed of. Let a copy of this order be given to the counsel for the respondent State.