IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W.P. ( S ) No. 1291 of 2008
Nizam Ahmad .... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand & Ors. ..... Respondents
Coram : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D.G.R. PATNAIK.
For the petitioner(s) : Mr M.A.Khan
For the opposite party: JC to SC Mines.
03.07. 2009. Heard the counsel for the petitioner and the
respondents.
2 The petitioner in this writ petition has prayed for the
following reliefs :
(i) for issuance of a direction to the respondents to pay
to the petitioner the amount of enhanced pension pursuant to the revision
in the pay scales in the year 1981, 1989 and 1996;
(ii) for issuance of direction to the respondents to make
notional pay fixation for the year 1981, 1989 and 1996 for revision of
pension amount payable to the petitioner;
(iii) for direction to the respondents to pay the
petitioner the arrear of revised pension which the petitioner would be
entitled on the basis of the notional pay fixation for the years 1981, 1989
and 1996, together with interest at the rate of 12 per cent per annum till the
date of payment.
3 The case of the petitioner is that he was appointed on
the post of Overseer under the respondents in the year 1940-41. He had
been promoted from time to time and he retired on 31.1.1977 from the
post of the Chief Estimator in the PWD department of the State Govt.
4. After retirement from service on and from 31.1.1997,
and after persistent demands for payment of pension, the petitioner was
informed by respondents that his service records were not traceable
However, a certificate dated 30.8.2005 ( Annexure 2) in respect of his last
pay drawn was issued to him in which his pay was shown at Rs. 404/- per
month and on the basis of which his pension was fixed at Rs. 137/- per
month.
5. In the month of September, 2006, when the petitioner
came to know that the amount of pension paid to him was far less than the
2
amount paid to his juniors, he filed a representation (annexure 4) dated
28.9.2006
to the Chief Engineer for fixing his revised pension by enhancing
the pension amount after giving him the revised scales of pay as
applicable to the petitioner. When no response was received, he forwarded
an appeal to the Prime Minister in January, 2007.
6. Ultimately, the petitioner was informed that the office
of the Accountant General had issued a letter to the respondents no.2 and
3 asking them to make a notional pay fixation of the petitioner. The letter
was followed by repeated reminders issued by the office of the Accountant
General till December, 2007.
7 Upon such persuasion, the respondent no.3 namely, the
Executive Engineer, PWD, Ranchi, issued a letter dated 27.11.2007 to the
petitioner calling upon him to fill up the requisite form annexed with the
letter and to submit the same in duplicate. The petitioner submitted the
duly filled in form before the respondent no. 3 on 18.12.2007 where-after
the respondents made correction in the calculation and revised the
amount of pension, but such correction and the amount of pension fixed
was only partial. The petitioner was not served with the details of the
fixation of the notional pay and the basis on which the respondents
arrived at the amount of Rs. 3000/- assessed as the payable amount of
pension. The grievance of the petitioner is that besides making only partial
revision in the fixation of pension amount, the respondents have not even
bothered to give arrears of pension accrued to the petitioner from the date
when the revision in the pay scale was notionally made effective and the
benefits thereof was supposed to be given to the petitioner.
8 No counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the
respondents. But the learned counsel for the respondent State submits that
in view of the annexures to the writ petition, if the petitioner is still
aggrieved, he may file a representation before the concerned authority of
the respondent which will be duly considered.
9 Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the
petitioner, within fifteen days from the date of this order, may file a fresh
representation before the concerned authority of the respondents stating
his claim and the grounds in support thereof and annexing a copy of this
order and within three months from the date of receipt of the
3
representation, the concerned authority of the respondents shall consider
the same and take an appropriate decision by passing a reasoned and
speaking order and effectively communicate such decision to the
petitioner. If the respondents are satisfied that the claim of the petitioner is
genuine and he is entitled to further enhancement of the amount of
pension, then the respondents shall not only pay the revised/enhanced
pension every month, but shall also assess the total amount of arrears
which may have accrued and pay the same within one month from the
date of decision taken on the petitioner’s representation, with interest at
the rate of 12 % per annum from the date when it fell due till the date of
final payment.
With the above observation, this application is disposed of.
Let a copy of this order be given to the counsel for the
respondents.
Ambastha/ ( DGR Patnaik, J )