Ganeshwar Mishra v. 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. The Secretary, Water Resources Department, Ranchi 3. The
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(S) No. 7509 of 2012 Ganeshwar Mishra ... ... … Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. The Secretary, Water Resources Department, Ranchi 3. The Secretary, Urban Development Department, Ranchi 4. The Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Dhanbad …. …. ... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHREE CHANDRASHEKHAR : Mrs. Ritu Kumar, Advocate For the Petitioner For the Respondent-Corporation : Mr. Indrajit Singh, Advocate For the State : Mrs. Nehala Sharmin, J.C. to Sr. S.C.-II 08/13.12.2013 The petitioner has approached this Court seeking a direction upon the respondents for release of arrears of salary from 01.03.2012 to 18.05.2012 and 19.05.2012 to 02.06.2012 and also for a direction for payment of arrears of revised salary with one increment from 01.01.2006 to May 2012 and for grant of benefit of M.A.C.P. 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents on record. 3. The brief facts of the case are that, the petitioner was appointed as junior engineer in the year, 1979 and he was posted at Dhanbad Municipal Corporation till 18.05.2012 and thereafter, he was reverted to Urban Development Department, Ranchi. Since the salary for the aforesaid period and grant of benefit of revised pay-scale and the M.A.C.P. have not been granted to the petitioner, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition. 4. A counter-affidavit has been filed by the respondent-State stating that the benefit of 1st and 2nd A.C.P. has been granted to 2 the petitioner and the benefit under M.A.C.P. Scheme has also been granted to the petitioner. 5. A counter-affidavit dated 22.07.2013 has been filed on behalf of the respondent no. 4 stating as under: 5.”That I say that the petitioner was initially appointed on 6.2.1979 on the post of Junior Engineer, Water Resources Department and subsequently the petitioner's service was transferred to Dhanbad Municipal Corporation on 14.10.2008. It is further submitted that the service of the petitioner was again shifted to his parental department i.e. Water Resource Department, Govt. of Jharkhand vide memo No. 3153 dated 2.6.2012 and accordingly the petitioner was relieved from the service of Dhanbad Municipal Corporation on 2.6.2012. 6. That I say that on scrutiny of the service records of the petitioner, it appears that the petitioner is getting financial benefits of 1st A.C.P. and 2nd A.C.P. since
Legal Reasoning
11.1.2006 without it being confirmed by the competent authority. It is necessary to mention herein that on perusal of the records special order no. 234/Sa.Ko. Dated 11.11.2006, it appears that the benefit of 1st A.C.P. and 2nd A.C.P. of the other employees whose name as listed therein was duly confirmed by the competent authority but the name of the petitioner was not found in the list of confirmation. 7. That I say that it is necessary to mention herein that the petitioner in conspiracy with the officers of Ranchi Municipal Corporation had illegally fixed the salary accordingly and service book of the petitioner was verified by the authority by ignoring the fact that the benefit of 1st and 2nd ACP was not confirmed by the competent authority. 8. That I say that the answering respondent vide letter no. 421 dated 17.4.13 had informed the Deputy Secretary to the Governor Secretariat, Govt. of Jharkhand and a copy of the same was also 3 addressed to the Secretary, Water Resource Department, Govt. of Jharkhand stating therein the entire facts of the case of the petitioner and it was also mentioned therein that excess amount of Rs. 6,38,336/- had illegally withdrawn by the petitioner and for that office of the respondents had already issued the letter no. 258 dated 5.3.2012 and letter no. 411 dated 17.4.2013 wherein the petitioner was directed to produce the relevant documents relating to grant of 1st and 2nd ACP of the petitioner before the authority so that the proper action for releasing of salary of the petitioner will be taken.” 6. A supplementary counter-affidavit dated 28.11.2013 has been filed on behalf of the respondent no. 4 stating as under: 4.” That I say that the office of the Water Resource Department, Government of Jharkhand had passed an order contained in Memo No. 6547 dated 4.11.2013 whereby the benefit of 1st and 2nd ACP to the petitioner was confirmed.” 7.
Legal Reasoning
The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has submitted that the controlling authority of the petitioner is the Water Resources Development Department, Government of Jharkhand and therefore, once the benefits under 1st A.C.P. and 2nd A.C.P. have been granted to the petitioner, the payment of salary for the period between 01.03.2012 to 18.05.2012 and 19.05.2012 to 02.06.2012 should not have been withheld by the respondent- Municipal Corporation and the respondent-Municipal Corporation is not justified in not issuing the 'last pay certificate' to the petitioner. 8. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent 4 no. 4 has admitted that letter dated 04.11.2013 by which the grant of benefit under 1st A.C.P. and 2nd A.C.P. has been approved by the Department of Water Resources, has been duly communicated to the respondent no. 4. 9. In view of the aforesaid, I am of the view that once the controlling authority of the petitioner has decided to approve the grant of 1st A.C.P. and 2nd A.C.P. as well as the benefit under M.A.C.P. to the petitioner, the salary for the period during which the petitioner was deputed with the respondent-Municipal Corporation, cannot be withheld by the respondent no. 4 on the ground that the benefit of A.C.P. has not been confirmed. From the counter-affidavit filed on behalf of the respondent no. 4, I do not find any other reason assigned for withholding the salary of the petitioner. I further find that the grievance of the petitioner in so far as, grant of benefit under 1st A.C.P., 2nd A.C.P. and
Decision
M.A.C.P. are concerned, stand redressed. The writ petition is allowed with a direction to the respondent no. 4 to release the salary of the petitioner for the period claimed in the present writ petition. It is further directed that the respondent no. 4 would issue the 'last pay certificate' to the petitioner within a period of four weeks from the production of a copy of this order. In the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, no interest is awarded to the petitioner. Satyarthi/ (Shree Chandrashekhar, J.)