JHARKHAND HIGH COURT ISSUES ORDER ON BINOD KUMAR SHARMA V/S THE STATE OF JHARKHAND AND ORS.

RANCHI, India, Sept. 17 -- Jharkhand High Court issued the following order on Aug. 18:

1. Heard the parties.

2. The petitioner in this writ petition prays for grant of approval of the pay-scale in terms of the recommendation of the University Grant Commission in the revised pay-scale pursuant to the report of the 5th Pay Revision Committee and thereafter 6th and 7th Pay Revision Committee.

3. It is the case of the petitioner that though the services of the petitioner was approved by the Ranchi University in compliance of the order of the High Court in CWJC No. 4021 of 1995 along with the others, the case of the petitioner has not been considered and he has not been paid the regular salary. It is his case that one of the similarly situated Professor, namely, Arun Kumar, Professor in Mathematics approached this Court by filing WP(S) 3253 of 2016. This Hon'ble Court considering that Arun Kumar has already been regularized vide Memo No. 3315 dated 04.10.1998 directed the respondents to consider the case of said Arun Kumar and pass an appropriate order.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that Arun Kumar's case was considered and thereafter he has been granted the benefit but the petitioner has been left out. He submits that the petitioner's name also finds place in the said Notification No. 3315 dated 04.10.1998 in sl. no. 9 for subject Physics showing his date of joining as 09.09.1985. The Notification dated 04.10.1998 was issued to regularise the service of the petitioner along with Arun Kumar and others. Thus, as per him the petitioner is entitled for the similar benefits.

5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State and the University submits that if the petitioner files a fresh representation and if it is found that the case of the petitioner is similar to that of Arun Kumar, his case will be considered and an appropriate order will be passed.

6. Learned counsel for the University submits that the University has already absorbed the petitioner and has forwarded the recommendation to the State and now it is the State who has to pass an appropriate order. Further he submits that the final order of date of absorption has already been passed in terms of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No. 6098 of 1997. The said decision was already taken on 07.03.2009.

7. Considering the said submission, I direct the petitioner to file a fresh representation before the Director, Higher, Technical Education & Skill Development Department within four weeks.

8. The representation should be filed within four weeks and the decision should be taken within six weeks thereafter.

9. If it is found that the petitioner is entitled for any benefits the same should be extended to the petitioner. If the claim of the petitioner is rejected for any reasons whatsoever the reasons should be communicated to the petitioner within a period of four weeks thereafter.

10. With the aforesaid observation and direction, this writ petition is disposed of.

Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.