Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Jharkhand High Court

Raj Nandan Ram And Otehrs vs The State Of Jharkhand And Other on 12 June, 2013

Author: Narendra Nath Tiwari

Bench: Narendra Nath Tiwari

                IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                               W.P.(S). No.3254 of 2012
            Raj Nandan Ram & Ors.                          .......... Petitioners. 
                                         ­Versus­
            The State of Jharkhand & Ors.                  ..........  Respondents.
                                            ­­­­­­
               CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA NATH TIWARI
                                            ­­­­­­
            For the Petitioners :           Mr. Arshad Hussain, Advocate
            For the State           :       J.C. to G.A.  
                                            ­­­­­­
08/12.06.2013

: In  this   writ   petition,   the   petitioners   have   prayed   for   a  direction on the respondents to pay the salary to the petitioners  which was not paid from 15th May, 2001 till their earlier absorption  in different departments.

The petitioners were appointed on the posts of Supervisors  in the Adult Education Programme in different stages between  1978   to   1987   by   observing   all   the   legal   formalities.   The   said  programme   continued   up   to   April   2001.   The   petitioners,  thereafter,   were   declared   surplus.   Subsequently,   they   were  adjusted   in   different   departments   along   with   other   similarly  situated   persons   in   August   2007.   However,   they   were  not   paid  salary of the intervening period.

Aggrieved  by  non­payment  of   salary   of  the   said  period,  similarly situated persons, namely Zahid Hussain and others, had  filed   W.P.(S)   No.   2774   of   2004   in   this   Court.   After   hearing   the  parties and considering the facts and materials on record, this  Court   has   disposed   of   the   writ   petition   holding   that   the   State  Government is duty  bound  to  pay  salary  to  the  petitioners  after   the   date   of abolition of Non­formal Education Project.  The   respondents   were   directed   to   pay   salary   to   the   said  petitioners for the intervening period.

The State­respondents contested the petitioners' claim up  to the Supreme Court, but they did not succeed. The said order  was upheld up to the Apex Court. 

It   has   been   submitted   that   the   petitioners'   case   is   fully  covered   by   the   decision   in  Zahid   Hussain   &   Ors.   Vs.   State   of   Jharkhand   &   Anr.   [W.P.(S)   No.   2774/2004].   The   petitioners   have  prayed for the same relief.

­2­ Learned   J.C   to   G.A.,   appearing   on   behalf   of   the  respondents,  has  not  disputed  the said facts  and contentions.  He further submitted that if the petitioners' case is similar to the  case of Zahid Hussain & Ors., similar treatment will be meted out  to   them,   if   they   approach   the   appropriate   authority.     He  submitted   that   the   Commissioner­cum­Secretary,   Human  Resources   Development   Department,   Government   of  Jharkhand is the competent authority to consider the petitioners'  claim and pass appropriate order.

In view of the said submissions, this writ petition is disposed  of giving liberty to the petitioners to file representation regarding  their   claim,   before   the   Commissioner­cum­Secretary,   Human  Resources   Development   Department,   Government   of  Jharkhand­Respondent No.2 with a copy of the decision of this  Court   in  Zahid   Hussain   &   Ors.  (supra).   On   receipt   of  representation, the said respondent shall consider the petitioners'  claim and pass appropriate order in accordance with law, within  six weeks from  the  date  of  receipt  of representation.

If   the   said   respondent   finds   that   the   petitioners'   case   is  identical to the case of Zahid Hussain & Ors. (supra), he shall pass  similar   order   regarding   payment   of   arrears   of   salary   to   the  petitioners for the period from 15th May, 2001 till the date of their  absorption in the service, within six weeks thereafter. 

If the amount(s) found payable to the petitioners is/are not  paid within the aforesaid period, the petitioners shall be entitled  to get interest @ 10% per annum from the date the amount(s) is /  are due till final payment.

 

(Narendra Nath Tiwari, J.) Sanjay/