Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2017 DIGILAW 908 (JHR)

Ramanand Prasad Singh, s/o late Jitendra Prasad Singh v. State of Jharkhand

2017-06-09

PRAMATH PATNAIK

body2017
JUDGMENT : Pramath Patnaik, J. In the accompanied writ application, the petitioner has prayed for issuance of writ of certiorari for quashing the order dated 18.04.2009 issued by the respondent no.3, whereby it has been stated that fixation of grade pay of Rs.4800/- instead of Rs.4200/- for the Instructor will be wrong and has further prayed for disposal of the writ application in the light of order of this Court passed in W.P.(S) No.2696 of 2009 and analogous cases by order dated 17.09.2013. 2. The brief facts, as disclosed in the writ application is that an advertisement was issued in the year 1991 for appointment of Instructors in vocational course in +2 Schools under the then State of Bihar as per Annexure-1 to the writ application. The said advertisement was issued by the Vidyalaya Seva Board, Bihar, Patna against vacancies in different trades indicated in the said advertisement for appointment of Instructors in +2 Schools. It has been stated that petitioners possessed criteria specified by the Central Government under the scheme of Vocational Technical Education having Graduate Degree in Agriculture vide Annexure-4 to the writ petition. The petitioners after their appointment are working as Instructors and are posted in respective schools. It has further been stated that petitioners were appointed in the scale of Rs.1500-2750/- and were possessing the recruitment qualification as mentioned in the Central Government Guidelines for instructors, their pay scales was revised in the scale of Rs.5000-8000/- with Grade pay of Rs.4800/-. However, subsequently vide Annexure-8, dated 18.04.2009 issued by the Secretary, Finance Department, Government of Jharkhand addressed to the Principal Secretary, Human Resources Development Department and also Welfare Department, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi it was indicated that appropriate regulations/rules be framed in the matter of appointment/promotion and other service condition of teachers under the State Government. This is also necessary in view of the Central Pay Structure/revision being implemented for such State Government employees. It was also indicated that under the resolution dated 28.02.2009 under Schedule-III the Scale of 10+2 Schools Instructors was placed in the Scale of Grade pay of Rs.4800/-. However, untrained Lecturers/Instructors are entitled to Grade pay of Rs.4200/-. Therefore, request was made to undertake an exercise in respect of verification of revised pay scale granted to the petitioners and to recover the excess Grade pay. 3. However, untrained Lecturers/Instructors are entitled to Grade pay of Rs.4200/-. Therefore, request was made to undertake an exercise in respect of verification of revised pay scale granted to the petitioners and to recover the excess Grade pay. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that this case be disposed of in the light of order dated 17.09.2013 passed by this Court in W.P.(S) No.2696 of 2009 and analogous cases wherein this Court has directed not to reduce the Grade pay of Rs.4800/- if they possess requisite qualification as prescribed by the Central Government guidelines. 4. Learned counsel for the State has no objection to that course of action, if the petitioners possess requisite qualification as prescribed by the Central Government guidelines. 5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, the question remains whether the petitioners do possess the necessary recruitment qualification prescribed under the Central Government guidelines or not is dependent on determination of facts upon the scrutiny of individual credentials/service records of the petitioners before undertaking such exercise to reduce the Grade Pay of Rs.4800/-. As per the resolution dated 28.02.2009, if they posses requisite qualification as prescribed by the Central Government, then there is no reason why Grade Pay should be reduced. In such circumstances, therefore, when on the main legal issue, there is no dispute about the interpretation of Resolution dated 28.02.2009 in question, the concerned respondents i.e the District Education Officer, where these individual petitioners are working, are directed to undertake an exercise of verification of individual service records of the petitioners in question so as to come to a finding whether they have fulfilled the required recruitment qualification as prescribed under the Central Government guidelines for being entitled to the Grade Pay of Rs.4800/-. Dependent upon such exercise, any consequential action would be taken. 6. Let such exercise be undertaken within a period of 12 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The general direction issued vide letter 18.04.2009 (Annexure-8) by the Secretary, Finance Department would be carried out in the manner as indicated hereinabove. If the amount has wrongly been recovered and if the petitioners are found to be having requisite minimum qualification as prescribed under the Central Government guidelines, excess amount recovered in case of individual petitioner’s, shall be refunded thereafter. 7. Accordingly, the writ application stands disposed of.