The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(S). No. 3004 of 2022 ---------- Dr. Vidya Sagar, son of Ganga Sagar, resident of 204/A, Shri Baijnath Residency, Road No. 5, near Divyayan Kusum Vihar, P.O. and P.S. Morabadi, Dist. Ranchi, Jharkhand. ……….. Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand through the Secretary/ Principal Secretary, Agriculture, Animal Husbandry and Co-operative Department, Nepal House, Doranda, P.O. and P.S. Doranda, Dist. Ranchi. 2. The Secretary/ Principal Secretary, Department of Planning-cum- Finance, Govt. of Jharkhand, Project Building, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, Dist. Ranchi. 3. The Accountant General, Jharkhand, Ranchi, P.O. and P.S. Doranda, Dist. Ranchi. 4. The State of Bihar through the Secretary/ Principal Secretary, Agriculture, Animal Husbandry and Co-operative Department, Secretariat, Civil Lines, P.O. and P.S. Sadar, Dist. Patna, Bihar. ………. Respondents. CORAM: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.N.PATHAK ---------- For the Petitioner For the Respondents
Legal Reasoning
----------- : Mr. Saurabh Shekhar, Advocate Mr. Shail Lakra, Advocate : Mr. Anil Kr. Singh, AC to GP-I Mr. Sudarshan Shrivastava, Advocate Mr. Diwakar Upadhyay, Advocate ---------- 2. In the instant writ application, petitioner has prayed for direction to the respondents to fix and release arrears of salary for the period from 01.01.2006 to the month of August, 2009 on the basis of revised pay-scale as per 6th PRC in favour of the petitioner. Further prayer has also been made for grant of one increment. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner at the outset draws attention towards paragraphs-13 and 14 of the supplementary counter- affidavit dated 19.10.2024 filed by the respondent No. 1 and very fairly submits that since the respondent-State is ready to make payment, suffice it 1 would be if a direction is given by this Court to release the amount within a stipulated period of time. It has been further argued that though respondent- State is ready to make payment but it has not whispered regarding payment of increment and as such, liberty may be given to the petitioner to ventilate his grievance with respect to payment of increment before the appropriate authority by filing fresh representation and the respondents may be directed to pass reasoned order on the same. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent-State emphatically argues that grievance of the petitioner has already been considered and effective measures have been taken for release of arrears taking into account the 6th PRC. The benefits shall be extended to the petitioner as per direction of this Court. 5. Mr. Sudarshan Shrivastava, learned counsel representing the respondent-Accountant General, Jharkhand, Ranchi submits that already a counter-affidavit dated 10.08.2022 has been filed and in para-6 it has been averred that, “letter No. 2262 dated 20.08.2010 of the Finance Department, Govt. of Jharkhand, Ranchi clearly stipulates that the officers whose transfer has been made on mutual basis, the benefits of 6th Pay Commission will be admissible to them only from the date of their joining in the State. As such, the office of the answering respondent has authorized the pay-slip in favor of the petitioner with effect from 13.08.2009 being the date of his joining vide Pay Slip No. 1317-1318 dated 27.02.2013. It is further to state and submit that Pay-Slip for NPA for April, 2000 has also been authorized by the Entitlement Cell, Finance Department, Govt. of Bihar vide Pay Slip No. 3211 dated 24/08/2000. However, the Pay Slip for the period of March, 2000 cannot be issued in favor of the petitioner since the Health Department, Govt. of Jharkhand, clearly enunciates in its letter no. 98(20) dated 11.03.2013 that NPA for the period prior to 01.04.2000 is not admissible to all types of Medical Officers”. 2 6. Mr. Diwakar Upadhyay, learned counsel for the respondent-State of Bihar has no objection if a direction is given to the respondents to pay the amount within a stipulated period as per undertaking given in para-13 and 14 of the supplementary counter-affidavit filed by the respondent-State of Jharkhand. 7. Having heard the parties at length, this Court is of the view that since State of Jharkhand has already taken initiatives for making payment which is crystal clear from paras-13 and 14 of the supplementary counter-affidavit dated 19.10.2024. The para-13 and 14 of the said counter-affidavit reads as under: “13. That it is humbly stated that in view of the stand as taken by the State of Bihar in its Counter-Affidavit, specifically Para-11 thereof, the answering Respondent i.e. the State of Jharkhand is taking all appropriate and necessary steps for the release of the arrears of salary with respect to the duration of the posting of the petitioner w.e.f. 17.08.2005 till 12.08.2009 as Touring Veterinary Officer in the State of Bihar as per the calculation thereof as submitted by the State of Bihar. 14. That it is humbly stated that with regards to the claims of the Petitioner concerning increments which has not been granted to the petitioner, the petitioner has made vague and unsubstantiated averments in the Writ Petition. The Petitioner has nowhere averred or stated as to for which year of period, his annual increment has not been granted. The State of Bihar in its Counter-Affidavit, specifically at Para-13 therein, has also noted the same. The answering respondents have vide letter no. 1081 dated 08.10.2024 have requested the Petitioner to provide the necessary and requisite details concerning the claims of the Petitioner concerning the increments which were not granted to the petitioner an in which period. However, no response or information has been received by the answering respondent by the petitioner providing such requisite information.” 8. As such, since the respondents are ready to make payment, they are directed to release the same in favour of the petitioner within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt/ production of a copy of this order. 9. As far as claim of the petitioner for payment of one increment is concerned, the petitioner is directed to file fresh representation annexing all 3 the relevant documents on which he is relying, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and after receiving the same alongwith the copy of this order, the respondents, shall consider the same in accordance with law and after giving ample opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and pass a speaking and reasoned order taking into account the prevalent rules, guidelines and circulars, within a further period of six weeks, which shall also be communicated to the petitioner. 10. It goes without saying that if the petitioner is found entitled for the benefits, as prayed for, the same may be extended to him within a further
Decision
period of four weeks. 11. With the aforesaid observations and directions the writ petition stands disposed of. kunal/- (Dr. S.N. Pathak, J.) 4