Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2019 DIGILAW 1109 (JHR)

Laldeo Prasad Singh, Son of Late Sukar Mahto v. State of Jharkhand

2019-06-11

SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI

body2019
ORDER : Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J. 1. Heard Ms. Shatakshi, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Krishna Shankar, learned counsel for the respondent nos. 1 to 5. Mr. Pankaj Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the respondent nos. 6 and 7 and Mr. Ashish Kr. Verma, learned counsel for the respondent no. 8. 2. The petitioner has preferred this writ petition for direction upon the respondents to fix and pay the final pension and gratuity especially in the pay scale of Malaria Inspector in pursuance to the order dated 30.3.1994 (Annexure-2) and for a further direction to the respondents to pay the difference of pay with effect from 9.8.1999 to 14.11.2000 arising of the recommendation of the 5th Pay Revision and to pay the financial benefit of the 3rd Modified Assured Career Progression Scheme since the petitioner has worked for more than thirty years and the annual increment with effect from 1.2.2006 till the date of superannuation i.e. 31.7.2009 to the petitioner. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondents have not fixed and paid the final Pension and Gratuity in the pay scale of Malaria Inspector in pursuance to the order dated 30.03.1994 (Annexure-2), the difference of pay with effect from 9.8.1999 to 14.11.2000 and the financial benefits of the 3rd Modified Assured Career Progression Scheme and the annual increment with effect from 1.2.2006 to 31.7.2009. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner draws the attention of this Court to the order dated 5.7.1993 passed by the Hon’ble Patna High Court in C.W. J.C. No. 8501 of 1992 by which respondents were directed to examine the case of the petitioners of C.W.J.C. No. 8501 of 1992 and find out if his case was squarely covered by order dated 4.5.1990 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 5151 of 1982 and it was further pleased to direct that if their case is found to be covered by the same then the same order shall be passed in that case also. So far as this issue is concerned at the first instance it needs to be considered by the State as to whether the petitioner is entitled for the same relief as directed by Hon’ble Patna High Court in C.W.J.C. No. 8509 of 1992 order passed on 05.07.1993. Pursuant to order of this Court the State of Jharkhand filed a supplementary counter affidavit dated 08.09.2017 and on paragraph no. Pursuant to order of this Court the State of Jharkhand filed a supplementary counter affidavit dated 08.09.2017 and on paragraph no. 6 it has been mentioned that on account of salary a sum of Rs. 21,294/- has already been paid to the petitioner which is annexed at Annexure-A to the supplementary counter affidavit. Final pension has also been fixed after the approval from the office of the Principal Accountant General, Jharkhand Ranchi vide pension intimation memo dated 07.06.2016 a copy has been annexed as Annexure-B to this supplementary counter affidavit. Learned counsel for the State of Jharkhand submits that a sum of Rs. 4,06,434/- has already been paid to the petitioner just after retirement on account of gratuity and rest of the amount of Rs. 17,699/- has been approved on 07.06.2016 by the office of Principal Accountant General, Jharkhand, Ranchi photocopy of gratuity payment order annexed as Annexure-C to the supplementary counter affidavit. Thus, the grievances of the petitioner have been redressed. 5. So far as 3rd M.A.C.P. is concerned, Mr. Krishna Shankar, learned counsel appearing for the respondent nos. 1 to 5, submits that the Office of the Medical Health Primary Centre, Hiranpur, Pakur has requested the Director Health, Jharkhand, Ranchi is to approve the benefit in view of the benefit of M.A.C.P. to the petitioner in view of the resolution no. 2981 dated 695 dated 01.09.2009 and the sanction for the same is awaited. 6. He further submits that in view of the above facts and circumstances of the case the pension, benefit of gratuity, difference of amount of gratuity, due salary, final pension has been fixed. The gratuity of Rs. 4,06,434/- has already been paid there is no need to pass any further directions or orders relates to the prayer of the petitioner. The State of Jharkhand needs to take final decision so far as pay fixation of the petitioner in pay scale of Malaria Inspector is concerned in the light of the order passed by the Hon’ble Patna High Court vide Annexure-1 to the writ petition. 7. Respondent no. 3, The Director-in-Chief, Health Services, Jharkhand, Ranchi is directed to examine as to whether the petitioner is fulfilling the criteria as laid down in the MA.C.P. scheme for granting 3rd M.A.C.P. or not. 8. In view of the above, the petitioner is directed to make a fresh representation before the respondent no. 7. Respondent no. 3, The Director-in-Chief, Health Services, Jharkhand, Ranchi is directed to examine as to whether the petitioner is fulfilling the criteria as laid down in the MA.C.P. scheme for granting 3rd M.A.C.P. or not. 8. In view of the above, the petitioner is directed to make a fresh representation before the respondent no. 3 for consideration of his prayer which relates to the pay scale in the post of Malaria Inspector and the 3rd M.A.C.P. within four weeks from the date of this order. The respondent no. 3 will consider the same and pass an effective order within four weeks thereafter with an intimation to the petitioner. 9. In view of the above, the writ petition stands disposed of.