The High Court
Case Details
- 1 - IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P(S) No. 5180 of 2015 ---- 1. Ramrup Bhagat, aged about 72 years, son of late Bhikhari Bhagat, resident of 5th Lane, new Colony, Netaji Subhash Nagar, Kantatoli, P.O.- G.P.O., P.S.-Lalpur, District-Ranchi, Jharkhand; 2. Naresh Mahto, aged about 79 years, son of late Madhusudhan Mahto, resident of Krishnapuri, P.O.+P.S.- Chutia, District-Ranchi, Jharkhand; 3. Norbert Ekka, aged about 72 years, son of Joseph Ekka resident of Dangratoli, Fatima Nagar, P.O.+P.S.-Lalpur, District-Ranchi, Jharkhand; 4. Shyama Devi, aged about 77 years, son of late Krishna Rout, resident of Chanakya Nagar, Road No.2, Railway Colony, Chutia, P.O.+P.S.- Chutia, District-Ranchi, Jharkhand; 5. Nagdish Singh, aged about 75 years, son of late Munnilal Singh, resident of House No.102, Chanakya Nagar South Railway Colony, Chutia, P.O.+P.S.-Chutia, District-Ranchi, Jharkhand; 6. Smt. Malti Devi, aged about 75 years, wife of late Gandur Ram, resident of Birsa Chowk, Pather Kocha, New By Pass Raod, District-Ranchi, Jharkhand; 7. Deocharan Singh, aged about 76 years, son of late Vishwas Singh, resident of Amrawati Colony, Chutia, P.O.+P.S.-Chutia, District-Ranchi, Jharkhand; 8. Baleshwar Prasad, aged about 73 years, son of late Keshar Prasad Yadav, resident of Road No.01, Krishnapuri, Chutia, P.O.+P.S.-Chutia, District-Ranchi, Jharkhand; 9. Baleshwari Devi, aged about 79 years, wife of late Jairam Sharma resident of Bedhana, P.O.-Jakhim, P.S.-Rafiganj, District-Aurangabad Bihar; … … Petitioners P.O.+P.S.-Doranda, Ranchi, Versus 1.The State of Jharkhand through its Secretary, Transport Department, Government of Jharkhand, PO+PS-Dhurwa, District-Ranchi 2. Divisional Manager-cum-District Transport Officer, Ranchi, PO-GPO, PS-Kotwali, District-Ranchi, Jharkhand 3. Divisional Manager-cum-District Transport Officer, Giridih, PO + PS-Giridih, District-Giridih, Jharkhand… Respondents ------- CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD ------ For the Petitioners : Mr. Anuj Burman, Advocate Mr. Birendra Kumar, Advocate For the Resp.-State : Mr. Rahul Saboo, GP-II Mr. Gaurang Jajodia, AC to GP-II -------- - 2 - Order No.11/Dated 17th February, 2024 By virtue of the order dated 18th December 2023 leave was granted to amend the prayers made in the Interlocutory Application being I.A No.2792 of 2023. 2. The relief was granted and in pursuance there to an amended writ petition has been filed. The respondent-State was also directed to file reply to the amended writ petition by the aforesaid order. 3.
Legal Reasoning
Mr. Gaurang Jajodia, the learned counsel appearing for the State has submitted that the copy of the amended writ petition has been served by Mr. Anuj Burman, the learned counsel for the petitioners but the counter- affidavit could not have been filed and, therefore, a prayer has been made to accept the said counter-affidavit in the court. 4. Considering the said submission, the counter- affidavit is taken on record. 5. The prayers made in the amended writ petition as would appear from the records read as under: “a. This Hon’ble Court may be pleased to direct the respondents concerned, especially respondent Secretary Transport Department, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi (respondent no.1), to publish necessary Gazette notification/resolution regularizing/absorbing the services of all the petitioners in the State Government, in the light of the decision dated 29-01-2020, in LPA No.264/2016, passed by Hon'ble Mr. Justice H.C. - 3 - Mishra and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Deepak Roshan, which stood upheld to Hon'ble Apex Court in SLP(C) No.3386/2021, Review Petition(C) No.785/2021 and Curative Petition No.19/2022, according to which it is held that all the employees of the Bihar State Road Transport Corporation, who were allocated the cadre of the state of Jharkhand shall be deemed to be absorbed w.e.f. 01-07- 2004: b. This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to direct the concerned respondents especially respondent Secretary Transport Department to pay the petitioners the following pre and post retiral benefits, in the light of the decision dated 29-01-2020, passed in LPA No.264/2016 (stood confirmed upto Hon'ble Apex Court) and the decision dated 19-12-2019, in W.P.(S) No.277/2018 and other analogous cases, passed by Hon'ble Mr. Justice Dr. S.N. Pathak (stood confirmed upto Hon'ble Apex Court vide order dated 03-03-2023 in SLP(C) No.20636-37/2022):- i. Arrears of salary under 5th and 6th pay revision committee recommendations from 01-07-2004 till the respective dates of the retirement of the petitioners; ii. Leave encashment; iii. Arrears of pension for the surviving employees or family pension for widow, from the respective date of superannuation till the date of actual payment starts; - 4 - c. So far as calculation of arrears of pension is concerned, this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to direct that the same may be done in the light of the decision taken in the resolution published in Jharkhand Gazette dated 12-01-2024, according to which, it is laid down that the pension is to be paid taking into consideration the past services rendered by the petitioners, which mean that if the petitioners have any particular salary structure when their services were to be placed in the State of Jharkhand, the said salary structure was to continue with addition of increment, if any, till they retired from their services; d. This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to hold and declare that discriminatory hostile treatment is being given to the petitioners at the hand of the respondents, in view of the fact that the respondents have already paid the aforesaid pre and post retiral benefits to several of the similarly situated employees of the Districts of Ranchi, Jamshedpur, Dhanbad and Dumka; e. And pass such other Order/(S) as Your Lordships may deem fit and proper.” 6. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners by referring to the paragraph nos.7 and 8 and also the resolution of the State Government dated 12th January 2024 has submitted that the decision has been taken by the State - 5 - Government for grant of the similar reliefs as the subject matter of the present writ petition. 7. It appears from paragraph no.8 that the State Government has also taken decision to extend the similar benefits to other identically placed employees like the writ petitioners hence, on the basis of the aforesaid decision taken by the State as referred in paragraph no.8 of the counter-
Decision
affidavit, the writ petition may be disposed of with a direction upon the State Government to take such a decision within a specific period. 8. The learned counsel appearing for the State has submitted that since the State has already taken a decision as it would appear from paragraph nos. 8 of the counter-affidavit and hence, eight weeks’ time is sought for to come out with an appropriate notification for redressing the said grievance of the petitioners in favour of the writ petitioners. 9. This court considered the submission made on behalf of the State and perused the paragraph nos.7 and 8 of the counter-affidavit which are quoted hereinbelow: “7.That it is humbly stated and submitted that the Department of Transport has notified the Resolution contained in Memo No.900 dated 12.08.2023 for the petitioners of Contempt Case (Civil) No.356 of 2020 and Contempt Case (Civil) No.366 of 2020, with regard to the regularization from 01.07.2004 for providing admissible retiral dues. - 6 - 8. That it is humbly stated and submitted that the answering opposite party is taking all necessary steps to expedite extending similar benefits to the petitioners of the instant case.” 10. The State has come out with a specific decision at paragraph no.8 that the similar decision shall be taken in favour of the writ petitioners and other identical employees as such decision is to be taken within eight weeks and therefore the present writ petition needs to be disposed of. 11. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction upon the Principal Secretary, Transport Department, Government of Jharkhand to act upon on the basis of the statement made in paragraph no.8 within eight weeks and come out with a notification within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 12. This writ petition stands disposed of with the aforesaid direction. sudhir/ (Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.)