Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2018 DIGILAW 2372 (JHR)

Somra Munda v. State Of Jharkhand

2018-10-25

S.N.PATHAK

body2018
JUDGMENT S.N.Pathak, J. - Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents. 2. The petitioner has approached this Court with a prayer for quashing the Memo No. 1301 dated 16.10.2017 issued by the Regional Deputy Director of Education, South Chhotanagpur Division, Ranchi, whereby the ACP/MACP earlier granted to the petitioner has been revised and it is directed to recover the excess amount paid to the petitioner. Further prayer has been made for a direction upon the respondents to pay the salary as granted earlier and approved by the Divisional Commissioner, South Chhotanagpur, Ranchi. 3. The facts of the case lies in a narrow compass. The petitioner is appointed and working as Clerk in the District of Ranchi within the State of Jharkhand and performing his duties to the utter satisfaction of the respondentauthorities. It is the case of the petitioner that vide Notification dated 13.08.1974 issued by Department of Education, Govt. of Bihar, the post of Senior Selection Grade has been prescribed subsequent thereof, vide Memo No. 129 dated 15.01.1977, three posts were also notified viz. (1) Lower Division Clerk (2) Upper Division Clerk (3) Senior Selection Grade and further vide Memo No. 559 dated 08.03.1980, the post of head clerk and super selection grade post were created and the aforementioned hierarchy of the posts is continuing as such and it is neither modified nor repelled till date. Thereafter, the Department of Finance, Govt. of Jharkhand issued the Resolution No. 2714/F dated 21.09.2007 wherein the pay scale of Head Clerk in Muffasil Establishment has been revised to Rs. 5000-150-8000/- in consonance with the recommendation of the Fitment Committee. Pursuant thereto, a clarification was sought by the District Accounts Officer, Ranchi for fixation of pay scale of Grade III employee of Education Department, which was accordingly clarified vide Memo No. 684 dated 21.05.2008 by the Regional Deputy Director of Education, South Chhotanagpur Division, Ranchi wherein, it was clarified that w.e.f. 10.07.2007, the pay scale of Grade III employee of the Education Department shall be fixed as per the hierarchy of their post and the pay of Head Clerk (Senior Selection Grade) shall be fixed in the scale of 5500-9000/-. It is further the case of the petitioner that he was granted the benefits of ACP/MACP vide Memo No. 266 dated 25.02.2009 with effective from due date, which was later on approved by the Divisional Commissioner/ Commissioner, Ranchi and also verified/ authenticated by District Accounts Officer, Ranchi. 4. It is the specific case of the petitioner that one fine morning the Director, Secondary Education, Department of School Education and Literacy, Govt. of Jharkhand issued a letter vide Memo No. 1018 dated 20.06.2017 regarding verification and examination of ACP/MACP granted to the Divisional Cadre Clerk of RDDE Office, Ranchi and formal show cause was issued to the petitioner with regard to the refixation of ACP/MACP. Pursuant thereto, the petitioner submitted his reply stating therein, that the benefits of ACP has been extended to him on the basis of Resolution No. 2714/F dated 21.09.2007 and the same was approved by the Divisional Commissioner and also verified/ authenticated by District Accounts Officer, Ranchi and as such, there is no illegality in the fixation of ACP. It is further stated that in case of similarly situated retired persons, their pensions have been fixed by the Office of Regional Deputy Director of Education, South Chhotanagpur Division, Ranchi pursuant to the Resolution No. 2714/F dated 21.09.2007 and the same has been approved and sanctioned by the Accountant General, Jharkhand and they are getting pension accordingly. But in the case of the petitioner, the Regional Deputy Director of Education, South Chhotanagpur Division, Ranchi vide Memo No. 1301 dated 16.10.2017 has re-fixed the pay of the petitioner in the pay scale of Rs. 4500-7000 instead of Rs. 5000-8000/- as admissible under the benefits of 1st ACP and also order of recovery has been passed ignoring the fact that the same has been granted as per the Govt. Resolution No. 2714 /F dated 21.09.2007 and also the fact that the same has got approval by superior authority than him i.e. Commissioner. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner has been compelled to knock the door of this Hon''ble Court for redressal of his grievances. 5. At the very outset, Mr. Deepak Kumar Prasad, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that as the issue involved in this writ petition is now no more res integra and this writ application is squarely covered by the order passed on 01.08.2018 by this Hon''ble Court in W.P. (S).No.6760 of 2017 along with other analogous cases. 5. At the very outset, Mr. Deepak Kumar Prasad, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that as the issue involved in this writ petition is now no more res integra and this writ application is squarely covered by the order passed on 01.08.2018 by this Hon''ble Court in W.P. (S).No.6760 of 2017 along with other analogous cases. Learned counsel further submits that this case may be disposed of in terms of orders passed in the aforesaid cases. 6. Per contra counter-affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondents. But, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents very fairly submits that issues involved in this writ petition has already been decided by this Hon''ble Court in W.P.(S).No.6760 of 2017 along with other analogous cases and if the case of the petitioner is found same and similar to the cases of the petitioners in W.P.(S).No.6760 of 2017 along with other analogous cases, the present petitioner is also entitled for the same benefits. 7. In view of the fair submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, this writ application is being disposed of in terms of the orders passed by this Court in W.P.(S).No.6760 of 2017 along with other analogous cases and if the case of the present petitioner is found same and similar to the cases of the petitioners in W.P.(S).No.6760 of 2017 along with other analogous cases, the present petitioner is also entitled for the same benefits. 8. In view of quashment of letter being Memo No. 1301 dated 16.10.2017 by this Court in W.P.(S) No. 6760 of 2017 and other analogous cases vide order dated 01.08.2018, further quashment of the same memo is not required. 9. Accordingly, I hereby direct the respondents-authorities to verify the factual aspects/ issues involved in the present writ petition vis--vis factual aspects/ issues involved in W.P.(S).No.6760 of 2017 along with other analogous cases and if the facts/ issues involved in the present writ petition is found to be similar to the aforementioned writ petitions, the same benefits may be extended to the present writ petitioner also, in accordance with law, within a period of 12 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 10. With the aforesaid observations, this writ petition stands disposed of.