Kamal Narayan Choudhary …. … v. Ranchi University, Ranchi. Vice Chancellor, Ranchi University, Ranchi. Registrar, Ranchi University, Ranchi. The State
Case Details
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(S) No. 773 of 2019 Kamal Narayan Choudhary …. …. Petitioner 1. 2. 3. 4. Versus Ranchi University, Ranchi. Vice Chancellor, Ranchi University, Ranchi. Registrar, Ranchi University, Ranchi. The State of Jharkhand through the Director, Department of Higher and Technical Education of Human Resource Development, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi. …. … Respondents For the Petitioner For the State For the Resp.-University :
Legal Reasoning
------ CORAM : HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE S.N. PATHAK ------ Mr. Vijay Bahadur Singh, Advocate : : Ms. Sunita Kumari, AC to Sr.S.C.-I Dr. Ashok Kumar Singh, Advocate Mr. Nilesh Modi, Advocate Mr. Shivam Singh, Advocate Mr. Prabhat Kumar, Advocate -------- 15/ 12.09.2023 Heard the parties. 2. Though the petitioner has made multiple prayers, but in course of arguments, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner confines the prayer for payment of differences of pay and allowance with effect from 01.01.1996 to 21.12.2004 in the revised pay scale of 5500- 9000 along with interest and thereby for fixation of pension and other retiral benefits. 3. The petitioner was appointed on 21.01.1995 as Upper Division Clerk in pay scale of Rs. 284-372 in Jagannath Nagar Degree College under Ranchi University. It is specific case of the petitioner that pay scales of Lower Division Clerk and Upper Division Clerk were merged by the Government of Bihar vide letter dated 5.10.1989 in the pay scale of 785-1210. Thereafter, the Ranchi University vide office order dated 25.4.1990 also adopted the merger scheme of the Government. Selection grade in the pay scale of Rs. 850-1360 and senior selection grade in the pay scale of 1540-2900 were sanctioned with effect from 1.4.1982 and 01.01.1986 to the employees of the University. The petitioner after rendering long service to the satisfaction of the respondents, superannuated on 31.10.2008. Later on, the pay scale of the petitioner was fixed at Rs. 1500-2750 upon merger of the posts of Head 2 Clerk, Accountant, Assistant and UDC/LDC vide letter no. 841 dated 13.4.1991 issued by the Government of Bihar. It is further case of the petitioner that although he is entitled for corresponding revised pay scale of Rs. 5500-9000 of the pay scale of 1500-2750, but the same was not extended to him and no difference of pay scale was given, which compelled the petitioner to knock the door of this Court. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner strenuously urges that since the pay scales of Upper Division Clerk and Lower Division Clerk were merged in the year 1990 and the same was adopted and implemented by the University from 01.01.1996, the petitioner is entitled for the said benefit. Learned counsel submits that although the petitioner has made several representations before the respondent authorities for extending the said benefit, but no heed was paid to such request and it was only in the year 2019, when a decision was taken regarding refusal of payment of such benefit. As such, under compelling circumstances, the petitioner has approached this Court for a direction upon the respondents to consider and extend the benefits as per his entitlement which has already been extended to other similarly situated persons. 5. Dr. Ashok Kumar Singh, learned counsel appearing for the respondent-University submits that admittedly, the merger which took place in the erstwhile State of Bihar for employees of the Secretariat was extended to the University employees, particularly to the employees of the Ranchi University by the then Commissioner of Education. He further submits that once the benefits have been extended to the employees of the Ranchi University, the present petitioner being the employee of Ranchi University is also entitled for such benefit in view of the policy decision. Learned counsel submits that the petitioner is not entitled for the benefits of Section Officer, as this post was never sanctioned in the college in question. Learned counsel further submits that counter affidavit has been filed, in which, specific stand has been taken in paragraph-8 that no post of Section Officer was sanctioned and as such, the petitioner is not entitled for the benefits of pay scale accrued to the post of Section Officer. However, he fairly submits that the petitioner is entitled for the benefits of pay scale to the tune of Rs. 5500- 3 9000 with effect from 01.01.1996 to 21.12.2004 as per 5th pay revision commission and thereafter, he is entitled for revised pays scale as per 6th Pay Revision Commission. 6. Ms. Sunita Kumari, learned counsel appearing for the respondent-State adopts the same arguments what have already been argued by learned counsel appearing for the respondent-University. 7. In view of fair submissions of learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the considered view that the petitioner is entitled for the revised pay scale of 5500-9000/- with effect from 01.01.1996 to 21.12.2004 as per 5th Pay Revision Commission. Since the petitioner has superannuated on 31.10.2008, admittedly, he is also entitled for the revised pay scale of 5500-9000 till the date of superannuation along with statutory interest at the rate of 6% per annum. 8. In the light of the aforesaid facts, I hereby direct the respondent-University to prepare a detailed chart and calculate the emoluments for which the petitioner is entitled to, taking into consideration the pay scale of 5500-9000 with effect from 1.1.1996. It is made clear that if sufficient fund is not available, the same may be recommended to the State for release of fund. Upon recommendation of the University, the State shall release the entire fund for which the petitioner is entitled to. Since the petitioner has already superannuated in the year 2008 itself, let it be made clear that even the pensionery benefits shall be given to the petitioner in the corresponding revised pay scale taking into consideration the last pay drawn by him. Let the entire exercises be undertaken within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 9.
Decision
This writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of. R.Kr. (Dr. S. N. Pathak, J.)