Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Jharkhand High Court

Maheshwar Prasad Tiwari & Ors. vs State Of Jharkhand & Ors. on 15 January, 2013

Author: Aparesh Kumar Singh

Bench: Aparesh Kumar Singh

      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                      W. P. (S) No. 1477 of 2005
      Maheshwar Prasad Tiwary & others             ..Petitioners
                             -Versus-
      The State of Jharkhand & others              ........Respondents.
                                     ---
      CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE APARESH KUMAR SINGH
                                     ---
      For the Petitioners            : Mr. Mahavir Prasad Sinha, Adv.
      For the Respondents            : M/s. Saket Upadhyay, J.C. to AAG.
      For the Accountant General : Mr. S. Shrivastava, Adv.
                                       --
11/15.1.2013

Heard learned counsel for the parties. 

These   writ   petitioners   have   approached   this   Court   for  commanding upon the respondents to revise and fix the pension of  these petitioners in the pay scale of Rs. 5000­8000/­ relying upon the  decision rendered in the case of another petitioner in W.P. (S) No.  2300 of 2002 vide judgment dated 12th May, 2004. 

The   case   of   the   present   petitioners   is   that   pursuant   to   the  judgment rendered by Annexure­1 i.e. CWJC. No. 4781 of 1982 and  by Annexure­3 i.e. CWJC No. 2458 of 1987, it was held that the post  of Auxiliary Health Workers and Block Extension Educators were at  par   and   they   were   entitled   to   get   the   same   scale   of   pay   of   Rs.  785­1210/­   w.e.f.   1st   of   April,   1981   and   subsequent   revision  thereupon.  

It is the case of the petitioners that they were Auxiliary Health  Workers   and   on   the   implementation   of   6th   Pay   Revision   the  Government has while revising their scale placed them in the scale of  Rs. 4000 to 6000/­ which was lower than the scale which they were  entitled.   The petitioners have relied upon a judgment rendered by  Patna High Court vide Annexure­4 i.e. CWJC No. 2330 of 2002 vide  judgment rendered  on  12th  May,  2004,  wherein,  according  to  the  petitioners,   the   petitioner   in   the   said   case   who   also   retired   as  Auxiliary Health  Workers was held to  be entitled  to the said pay  scale of Rs. 5000­8000/­ and consequent fixation of pension based  upon the last pay drawn by him. 

The   petitioners   in   the   present   case,   however,   submits   that  despite dispute raised in respect of the pay anomaly by their Union it  was not corrected by the time the petitioners retired and therefore  they have come before this Court with the present prayer after the  retirement.  

­2­ The respondents were given time earlier to file affidavit and  thereafter they have filed supplementary counter affidavit also on the  specific queries made by this Court in the order dated 11th April,  2012.     The   respondents   in   their   supplementary   counter   affidavit,  however, have stated that these petitioners were posted as Auxiliary  Health Workers in the pay scale of Rs. 3050­4590/­ in the 5th Pay  Revision and were granted the benefit of ACP as per which they  were   getting   the   scale   of   Rs.   4000­6000/­   at   the   time   of   their  retirement.  On the other hand, the Block Extension Educators were  granted the scale of Rs. 5000 to 8000 under the 5th Pay Revision and  the nature and duties of the two posts were quite different as the  Auxiliary   Health   Workers   were   required   to   work   with   ANM  vaccination   while  the   Block   Extension  Educator  had  to  undertake  supervisory work under the block level/ PHC Level. 

I have heard learned counsel for the parties.  The petitioners  appear to have been made out a case that they were entitled to similar  treatment as given to Block Extension Educator. In this regard they  have   relied   upon   the   judgment   by   Patna   High   Court   as   also   the  judgment rendered by this Court in CWJC No. 2330 of 2002.   Of  course, the petitioners have retired in the scale of Rs. 4000 ­6000 but  it   appears   that   the   very   question   whether   these   Auxiliary   Health  Workers   were   to   be   granted   the   said   scale   of   Block   Extension  Educator in view of the judgments rendered by the Patna High Court  and also referred to in the judgment rendered by this Court in WP (S)  No.   2300   of   2002   have   not   been   given   proper   attention   by   the  respondents and it requires reconsideration on their part.   In these  circumstances, the petitioners are directed to approach the Director  ­in­Chief,  Health   Services,  Government of  Jharkhand,  Respondent  no.4 with a fresh representation for consideration of their claim for  grant of scale of Rs. 5000­8000/­ and consequent revision in post  retirement benefits.  If the petitioners make a representation together  with all supporting facts and documents within a period of 3 weeks  before   the   respondent   no.   4,   Director   ­in­Chief,   Health   Services,  Government of Jharkhand, he shall consider the same in accordance  with  law  and pass a reasoned and speaking order within a period of  ­3­ 16   weeks   thereafter,   which   shall   also   be   communicated   to   the  petitioners. It is made clear that if the petitioners are also entitled to  the same scale of Rs. 5000­8000 at par with the Block Extension  Educator, and if their grievances are found to be genuine and legally  admissible, consequential orders thereupon including the payment of  the revised arrears of pay and post retirement benefits be paid to the  petitioner within a further period of 8 weeks thereafter. 

The   writ   petition   stands   disposed   of   with   the   aforesaid  observations/directions. Consequently I. A. No. 1015 of 2011 also  stands disposed of.  

(Aparesh Kumar Singh, J) jk