Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2011 DIGILAW 598 (JHR)

Ram Krishna Singh v. State of Jharkhand

2011-07-06

R.R.PRASAD

body2011
JUDGMENT 1. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing for the State. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was initially engaged on the post of Mal Peon in the year 1965 at Circle Office, Gola. Subsequently, his services were absorbed in the same Office w.e.f. 01.12.1965, though it was not on regular basis. 3. However, the petitioner was appointed on a regular basis w.e.f. 06.12.1966 and then he was posted as Revenue Karamchari at Ichak Circle. In course of time, the petitioner was given 1st time bound promotion in the year 1981. There upon after considering the satisfactory service of the petitioner, the petitioner was granted 2nd time bound promotion in the year 1989 w.e.f. 01.04.1984. The petitioner on being granted 2nd time bound promotion was being paid salary in upgraded scale. 4. In course of time, the petitioner got retired on 31.01.1999 and the pension was fixed on the pay scale last drawn. Suddenly, when the petitioner came to know that the Deputy Commissioner (Establishment), Hazaribagh has passed an order as contained in Memo No.906/Estb. dated 28.07.2001, whereby the date of admissibility of 2nd time bound promotion was changed from 01.04.1984 to 23.12.1991, the said order as contained in Memo No.906/Estb. dated 28.07.2001 (Annexure-B series to the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondent Nos.3 and 4 ) has been challenged to be bad. 5. It was further submitted that while the writ application was pending for consideration, a counter affidavit was filed wherein an order as contained in Memo No.1769 dated 26.12.2001(Annexure-B series to the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondent Nos.3 and 4 ) passed by the Deputy Commissioner (Establishment), Hazaribagh was annexed from which the petitioner came to know that Super Time Scale granted to the petitioner in the year 1981 w.e.f. 01.01.1993 has been cancelled. That order as contained in Memo No.1769 dated 26.12.2001 has been challenged to be bad. 6. That order as contained in Memo No.1769 dated 26.12.2001 has been challenged to be bad. 6. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that both the order passed on 28.07.2001 by the Deputy Commissioner (Establishment), Hazaribagh, by which date of grant of 2nd time bound promotion was shifted from 01.04.1984 to 23.12.1991 and also the order dated 26.12.2001, by which Super Time Scale granted to the petitioner was cancelled, were passed without giving any notice or hearing to the petitioner and as such, on this ground alone, both the orders, which suffer from illegality, are fit to be set aside. On other score also, the impugned orders are liable to be set aside, as nd time bound promotion w.e.f. 01.04.1984 and also the Super Time Scale were given to the petitioner, without there being any misrepresentation on the part of the petitioner and hence, the petitioner cannot be deprived of the benefit accrued to him and, therefore, both the orders are fit to be set aside. 7. As against this, learned counsel appearing for the State submits that since the 2nd time bound promotion has wrongly been given w.e.f. 01.04.1984, it was rectified by making it effective w.e.f. 23.12.1991 and, therefore, the impugned order dated 28.07.2001 cannot be said to be illegal. 8. I do not find any substance in the submission advanced on behalf of the State. 9. Admittedly, both the impugned orders have been passed without giving any opportunity to the petitioner and that too when the petitioner got retired from the service. Moreover, order granting 2nd time bound promotion w.e.f. 01.04.1984 and then order granting Super Time Scale to the petitioner w.e.f. 01.01.1993 had been passed by the authority, without there being any misrepresentation on the part of the petitioner and as such, both the orders are liable to be set aside on the aforesaid two grounds. Accordingly, both the orders, as contained in Memo No.906/Estb. dated 28.07.2001 and Memo No.1769 dated 26.12.2001 (Annexure-B series to the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondent Nos.3 and 4), are hereby set aside. 10. Consequently, the respondent No.3-Deputy Commissioner, Hazaribagh is, hereby, directed to refund the money to the petitioner amounting to Rs.45,463/-with interest @ 5% to be calculated from the date of recovery of the amount till its payment within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. 10. Consequently, the respondent No.3-Deputy Commissioner, Hazaribagh is, hereby, directed to refund the money to the petitioner amounting to Rs.45,463/-with interest @ 5% to be calculated from the date of recovery of the amount till its payment within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. Meanwhile, the petitioner by approaching the authority would furnish his account number of the Bank so that amount be deposited in the Bank 11. In the result, this writ application is allowed. 12. Before parting with this order, it be recorded that it had been admitted on behalf of the State that the revised salary of the petitioner has been fixed in the Pay Scale of Rs.3200-4900/-w.e.f. 01.01.1996 and hence, it is desirable that the pension be fixed accordingly.