Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2021 DIGILAW 236 (JHR)

Khiromani Mahto v. State of Jharkhand

2021-02-24

DEEPAK ROSHAN

body2021
JUDGMENT : Heard learned counsel for the parties through V.C. 2. The instant writ application has been preferred by the petitioner-Himanshu Mahto praying therein for a direction upon the respondent-State to resend the service book and the pension paper of the petitioner to the respondent-Accountant General to fix the retiral benefits and pension of the petitioner and to issue the P.P.O. on the basis of last salary drawn in the pay scale of Rs.2200-150-4000, now revised in the pay scale of Rs.7500-175-12000. During pendency of this application; the original-petitioner died and his legal heirs were substituted at his place by the order of this Court. 3. Mr. Lakhan Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner passed M.A. examination in the year 1986 and was granted pay scale of Rs.2000-2300-3500 while working as B.A. Trained Teacher and was directly recruited as Headmaster. Subsequently vide letter No.6022-V (2) dated 08.12.1989, the original-petitioner was granted higher scale of M.A. trained i.e. Rs.2200-4000/-and his basic salary was fixed at Rs.2275 on 01.05.1990, Rs.2350/- on 01.05.1991, Rs.2425/-on 01.05.1992 and the same was entered into the service book of the original petitioner. The salary was again calculated and fixed at Rs. 9500/-on 01.05.2000 and Rs.9750/-on 01.05.2001 and Rs.10,000/-on 01.05.2002 and Rs.10250/-on 01.05.2003 which was also duly entered in the service book. He further submits that the original-petitioner after completion of 60 years retired from service on 31.03.2008 and 90% Provisional Pension was fixed at Rs.7594/-by the Department and 90% of the Provisional Gratuity to tune of Rs.3,15,000/-was also sanctioned and recommendation was made for issuance of P.P.O and G.P.O. Thereafter, an objection was raised by the Office of Accountant General and the matter was clarified by the District Superintendent of Education. However in-spite of aforesaid clarification, the office of Accountant General again returned the service book and pension paper requesting the District Superintendent of Education (respondent no.4) to remove the anomaly in fixation of pay scale and due to this; last pay drawn was reduced and pension has been reduced for what he was originally entitled. 4. However in-spite of aforesaid clarification, the office of Accountant General again returned the service book and pension paper requesting the District Superintendent of Education (respondent no.4) to remove the anomaly in fixation of pay scale and due to this; last pay drawn was reduced and pension has been reduced for what he was originally entitled. 4. A counter affidavit has been filed in this case by the State wherein at paragraph No.6 (c) it has been stated that as per resolution No.6022 dated 18.12.1989, which is mentioned at serial No.3(Kha) of schedule-II; that after completion of 12 years of service in the pay scale of Rs.2000-3500 (which was granted to the petitioner on 01.05.1990); the petitioner was entitled to get pay scale of Rs.2200-4000, but surprisingly, he was able to get the senior pay sale of the Headmaster w.e.f. 01.05.1990 itself and his pay was fixed at Rs.2275/-and as a result, the original-petitioner has wrongly withdrawn the pay thereafter. 5. Learned counsel for the state contended that from perusal of the extract of the service book of the petitioner it is evident that the original-petitioner has got both the pay scale on same date i.e. pay scale of Headmaster and the senior pay scale of the Headmaster, which was to be granted after 12 years from 01.05.1990 i.e. on 01.05.2002; however, he drew both the pay scale wrongly w.e.f. 01.05.1990 itself; as such, after the query received from the Office of Accountant General, the same was rectified and necessary papers were sent. 6. Mr. S. Srivastava, learned counsel for the Accountant General reiterates his statement made in paragraph Nos. 3, 4 and 5 of the counter affidavit which is quoted herein below:- “3.That it is stated and submitted that the service book and pension papers has been furnished by the DSE, Kharsawan-Saraikela vide letter no.588 dated 15.05.2008. On scrutiny of service book of the petitioner it was noticed that the department has granted the Headmaster pay of Rs.2000/-in the scale of Rs.2000-3500/-as on 01.05.1990. Again the department has granted Sr. scale of Rs.2200-4000 on the same date and as such the case was returned by the office of the answering respondent for clarification. On scrutiny of service book of the petitioner it was noticed that the department has granted the Headmaster pay of Rs.2000/-in the scale of Rs.2000-3500/-as on 01.05.1990. Again the department has granted Sr. scale of Rs.2200-4000 on the same date and as such the case was returned by the office of the answering respondent for clarification. The DSE resubmitted the case vide its letter no.1004 dated 25.06.2008 stating that the scale of Rs.2200-4000/-has been granted to the petitioner after attainment of qualification laid down for post graduate teacher as per instruction contained in Schedule-II of Govt. of Bihar, Finance Department Resolution No.3/PAR-01-03/89-6022F(2) dated 18.12.1989. 4.That it is further stated and submitted that it is clearly mentioned in para-2 of the above resolution that the initial scale of Rs.1640-2900 will be allowed to Graduate Trained Teachers in Middle Schools. After 12 year in the scale of Rs.1640-2900 they will be entitled to get the senior scale of Rs.2000-3500/-and the selection scale of Rs.2200-4000 will be admissible only after 12 years of service in senior scale and on attainment of qualification laid down for post graduate teacher. In para-3 of the above resolution the initial pay of Middle school Headmaster will be fixed in the scale of Rs.2000-3500/-and after completion of 12 years of service in the scale of Rs.2000-3500/-they will get the scale of Rs.2200-4000/-. 5.That it is stated and submitted that the petitioner did not fulfill the contention as per the said resolution, therefore, the case was again returned by letter dated 08.08.2008 with a request to resubmit the same after clarification.” Relying upon the aforesaid statements learned counsel submits that after rectification, the department sent the papers and thereafter P.P.O, G.P.O, CVP have been issued in favour of the petitioner. 7. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after going through the specific assertion made in paragraph No.3 and 4 of the counter affidavit filed by the office of Accountant General, it appears that the department has granted Headmaster pay scale of Rs.2000-3500/-to the petitioner on 01.05.1990 and again department granted senior selection pay scale of Rs.2200-4000/-on the same date; as such, the case was returned for rectification. From perusal of schedule-II of the resolution No.6022 dated 18.12.1989 of the Finance Department; it clearly transpires that an employee is entitled for senior selection scale after 12 years of his service and after procuring the required certificate, he can be promoted for selection grade pay scale. Meaning thereby to say that when the original-petitioner received the senior grade scale, then after 12 years he was entitled for selection grade scale as such, due to wrong interpretation of the circular he withdrew more amount for which he was not entitled. However, after query made by the Accountant General, the anomaly was rectified and papers were sent to the office of Accountant General and thereafter authorized pension order was issued. 8. In view of the aforesaid facts, I do not find any illegality in pay fixation of the original-petitioner and as a result, no relief can be granted and the instant writ application is dismissed being devoid of merit.