Patna High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.7137 of 2013 ====================================================== Deonandan Prasad Singh S/O Late Surju Prasad Resident Of Mohalla - Jakkanpur, P.S. Jakkanpur, Distt. - Patna .... .... Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Bihar Through The Principal Secretary, Agriculture Department, Govt. Of Bihar, Patna 2. The Secretary, Agriculture Department, Govt. Of Bihar, Patna 3. The Director, Agriculture, Vikash Bhawan, New Secretariat, Govt. Of Bihar, Patna 4. The District Agriculture Officer, Aurangabad 5. The Assistant Director, Horticulture, Patna Division, Patna, Mithapur, Patna .... .... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance: For the Petitioner : Mr. Awadhesh Pd. Sinha, Advocate Mr. Mrityunjay Narain, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Ajay, SC-XI ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MIHIR KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 2 08-05-2013
Legal Reasoning
Heard learned counsel for the parties. The prayer of the petitioner in this writ application reads as follows:- “for payment of salary to the petitioner from 1.11.2009 till 30.11.2012 and further to pay the House Rent to the petitioner for the month of September 2008 to December 2008 as well as the benefits of C.P.F. from the month of September 2008 till his date of retirement i.e. 30.11.2012.” Learned counsel for the petitioner having filed supplementary affidavit today has submitted that during pendency of this writ application, the petitioner’s salary has been paid from 23.11.2009 to 31.5.2012 and, therefore, his grievance now remains Patna High Court CWJC No.7137 of 2013 (2) dt.08-05-2013 2/5 only for payment of salary from 1.11.2009 to 22.11.2009 as also from 1.6.2012 to 30.11.2012, the day on which he had ultimately retired from service. He has further submitted that since the payment of arrear of salary of the petitioner has been made in one go in the month of March, 2013, the respondents may be directed now to take appropriate step for depositing the CPF contribution of the petitioner so that the petitioner can also pay his share in order to get his entitlement under CPF. He has also submitted that House Rent Allowance (H.R.A.) for the period September, 2008 to December, 2008 as has also not been paid to him as would be evident from the difference of arrear of salary statement. Considering the fact that the petitioner is a retrenched employee of the Bihar State Agriculture Marketing Board and he was sought to be absorbed in the government service of the State Government, this Court would not treat the case of the petitioner as an employee to have been denied payment of salary for no justifiable reason. Here, there were many jinxed issue tagged with the concept of absorption of the employees of the Agriculture Marketing Board in the services of the State Government and, therefore, this Court, having found that the petitioner has already been paid his arrear of salary from 23.11.2009 to 31.5.2012, can only direct the competent authority to look into the rest of the grievance of the petitioner as has been noted above. Patna High Court CWJC No.7137 of 2013 (2) dt.08-05-2013 3/5 In this regard it has to be noted that the petitioner has supported his claim for payment of salary for the period 1.11.2009 to 22.11.2009 by referring to a letter of the defunct or dissolved Agriculture Marketing Board wherein it is claimed that the services were utilized for handing over charge and also doing the land acquisition work. This aspect of the matter has infact been clarified by the Under Secretary to the Bihar State Agriculture Marketing Board in his letter no. 20 dated 9.1.2013 wherein he has no certify an event of 1.11.2009 to 30.11.2011 and therefore the same is required to be crossed check by some one in the State Government because the petitioner could not have worked at two places in the same period. Since the petitioner has been paid his salary from 23.11.2009 to 30.11.2009 and at the same time the letter dated 9.1.2013 also states that the petitioner was continuing in the Board from 1.11.2009 to 30.11.2011, such entitlement of the petitioner towards the salary for the period 1.11.2009 to 23.11.2009 as claimed by him should be examined by the competent authority who must himself decide such claim of the petitioner on the basis of documentary evidence of working of the petitioner strictly in accordance with law and if there be proof of the working of the petitioner for the aforesaid period, his salary alike other payment of salary of other similarly situated employees for the aforesaid period must be paid to him. Patna High Court CWJC No.7137 of 2013 (2) dt.08-05-2013 4/5 To that extent, the petitioner will also have a liberty to establish about his working in the relevant period on the basis of the documentary evidence some of which have also been annexed with this writ application. As with regard to the claim of CPF, this Court having the background of the petitioner being an employee of the dissolved Agriculture Marketing Board, would direct the competent authority to give the petitioner similar benefit which has been given to the other employees of the dissolved Board and in fact for this also if the CPF contribution has been deposited in cases of other employees after retirement as is the case of the petitioner, necessary steps will be taken. In any event the petitioner’s claim of CPF may also be examined and decided by a speaking order. Finally, with regard to the claim of the petitioner for payment of House Rent Allowance (H.R.A.) for the period he was working in the office of Assistant Director, Horticulture as shown in Annexure-18, the concerned authority will have to took into as to why the petitioner was not paid his House Rent Allowance for those four months and if it is found that the petitioner is entitled for such H.R.A., same may be paid to him or else an order rejecting the same with reasons must be communicated to the petitioner. Patna High Court CWJC No.7137 of 2013 (2) dt.08-05-2013 5/5 As with regard to the claim of salary for the period 1.6.2012 to 30.11.2012, the claim of the petitioner for salary shall be decided on the basis of his working at transferred place at Aurangabad and if the petitioner had complied the order of his transfer and had also worked on the transferred place as is claimed by the petitioner on the strength of Annexure 15 & 16 to this writ application the competent authority must do the needful for ensuring payment of salary for the aforesaid period. In the event, the petitioner’s salary for the aforesaid period shall be denied, the competent authority in his order will be also required to give reasons for the same. All the aforesaid claims of the petitioner as directed above must be decided by the competent authority within a period of three months from the date of filing of the representation enclosing a copy of this order. With the aforementioned observations and direction,
Decision
this application is disposed of. (Mihir Kumar Jha, J) Rishi/-