High Court Jharkhand High Court

Birendra Kumar Singh vs State Of Jharkhand And Ors. on 6 September, 2005

Jharkhand High Court
Birendra Kumar Singh vs State Of Jharkhand And Ors. on 6 September, 2005
Equivalent citations: 2006 (2) JCR 342 Jhr
Author: S Mukhopadhaya
Bench: S Mukhopadhaya


ORDER

S.J. Mukhopadhaya, J.

1. This writ petition has been preferred by the petitioner against the letter No. 753, dated 13th March, 2004 issued by Under Secretary, Water Resources Department, Government of Jharkhand and the Letter No. 63, dated 18th March, 2004 issued by the Superintending Engineer, Advance Planning Investigation and Hydrology Division No. 1, Deoghar. By the aforesaid letters it was ordered to retire the petitioner with effect from 18th March, 2004 on the ground that he having completed 40 years of service.

2. According to the petitioner, he was appointed in the service of the State on 5th July, 1962 as Gauge Reader in the work charge establishment. The petitioner proceeded on medical leave as he was suffering from tuberculosis and his service was terminated vide letter No. 641, dated 8th November, 1972. Subsequently, he having produced medical certificate and vide letter No. 606, dated 10th April. 1974 of the office of the Executive Engineer, he was allowed to join duty but again his service was terminated with effect from, 1st November, 1974 vide letter No. 620, dated 28th October, 1974. The petitioner thereafter submitted certificate of Medical Board and was allowed to re-join on 12th June, 1975. Thereafter, his service was taken iri the regular establishment vide Memo No. 1446, dated 8th November, 1982 wherein he continued till the issuance of impugned letter No. 753, dated 13th March, 2004.

3. The grievance of the petitioner is that though his date of birth recorded in his service book is 7th August, 1946 and he is entitled to continue in service till the age of superannuation i.e. 58 years, but he has been wrongly superannuated 5 months 13 days prior to the date of superannuation.

4. The stand taken by the respondents is that the minimum age for appointment in Government service is 18 years and the date of superannuation is after attaining the age of 58 years, whereas the age of retirement is 58 years. Therefore, a Government employee can continue in service only for a period of 40 years,

5. Similar issue fell for consideration before this Court, in the case of Kalanand Jha v. State of Jharkhand reported in 2001 (3) JCR 228 (Jhr). In that case also a Government employee was made to retire on the ground that the employee completed of 40 years of service. This Court having noticed Rules 54 and 73 of the Bihar Service Code, 1952 and other rules held that a Government employee is entitled to continue in service upto the age of superannuation (58 years at that time) and set aside the order by which employee was forced to retire on completion of 40 years of service.

6. Similar was the view of Division Bench of the Patna High Court in the case of Mokhtar Ahmad v. B.S.R.T.C. reported in 1995(1) PLJR 183, which was followed by this Court in the case of Mantu v. C.C.L. reported in 2001 (1) JCR 181 (Jhr).

7. The case of the petitioner being covered by aforesaid decisions he was also entitled to continue in the service of the State upto 58 years of age. The letter No. 753, dated 13th March, 2004 issued by Under Secretary, Water Resources Department, Government of Jharkhand and the letter No. 63, dated 18th March, 2004 issued by the Superintending Engineer, Advance Planning Investigation and Hydrology Division No. 1, Deoghar, are, accordingly, set aside. The petitioner is reinstated in service till he attained the age of 58 years, i.e. upto 31st August, 2004. He being entitled for the full salary of the intervening period i.e. for the period from 18th March, 2004 to 31st August, 2004, shall be entitled to receive the arrears of salary. He will be also entitled to get the consequential benefit on the basis of last pay as deemed to have drawn by him in August, 2004. The respondents are directed to pay the petitioner all consequential benefits such as salary, retirement benefit etc. within a period of three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.

8. The writ petition is allowed with the aforesaid observations and directions. However, in the facts and circumstances of the case, there will be no order as to the costs.