Ravi Shankar Kumar Akela vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 18 October, 2011

                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                       Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.7472 of 2009
                                Ravi Shankar Kumar Akela
                                             Versus
                                 The State Of Bihar & Ors
                                ----------------------------------

with
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.8512 of 2009
Dr.Prabhakar Sinha
Versus
The State Of Bihar & Ors

———————————-

15. 18.10.2011 This writ petition has been filed in the form

of P.I.L. for sanction of pension @ 2500/- and

5000/- respectively, who had undergone

imprisonment in the so called J.P. Movement which

arose between 18.3.1974 to 21.3.1977.

Even though the memo contains several

category but learned counsel for the petitioner

confines his relief to the first category of people who

are classified as per Clause-I of such memo which

reads as follows:-

yksduk;d t;izdk”k ukjk;.k ds usr`Ro esa fnukad
08-03-1974 ls 21-03-1977 rd dh vof/k esa iztkra= ds vfLrRo dks
cpkus ,oa turk ds ekSfyd vf/kdkjksa ds laj{k.k gsrq pyk;s x;s
vkanksyu esa Hkkx ysus okys oSls O;fDr;ksa tks mDr vkanksyu ds nkSjku
ehlk ,oa Mh0vkbZ0vkj0 esa ,d ekg ls N% ekg rd rFkk N% ekg ls
vf/kd fo:) jgs gSa dks dze”k% 2500@& ¼nks gtkj ikap lkS½ :i;k
,oa 5000@& ¼ikap gtkj½ :i;k ekfld ÞlEeku isa”kuß ,oa lanHkZxr
vof/k esa blh dksfV ds tsy esa e`r ,oa iqfyl Qk;fjax esa ekjs x;s
O;fDr;ksa ds ifr@iRuh dks 5000@& ¼ikap gtkj½ :i;k ekfld
lEeku is”a ku ,oa iqfyl Qk;fjax esa xksyh ls ?kk;y] O;fDr;ksa dks
2500@& ¼nks gtkj ikap lkS½ :i;k ekfld lEeku is”a ku nsus dk
2

fu.kZ; jkT; ljdkj }kjk fy;k x;k gSA
mi;qZDr dksfV ds O;fDr;ksa dks fcgkj jkT; iFk ifjogu
fuxe dh clksa esa jkT; ds vUnj eqQ~r ;k=k dh lqfo/kk] jkT;
ljdkj ds vLirkyksa ,oa lh0th0,p0,l0 ls ekU;rk izkIr xSj
ljdkjh futh vLirkyksa rFkk le;≤ ij ljdkj }kjk vf/klwfpr
xSj ljdkjh vLirkyksa esa Lo;a ,oa ifr@iRuh ds fy, fpfdRlh;
lqfo/kk rFkk igpku i= dh lqfo/kk miyC/k djkus dk fu.kZ; fy;k
x;k gSA
1- ;g ;kstuk ts0ih0 lsukuh lEeku ;kstuk dgyk;sxhA ;g ;kstuk
fnukad 01-06-2009 ls izHkkoh gksxhA
2- ,d ekg ls de vof/k ds fy, dkjkxkj esa jgs vFkok Hkwfexr jgs
O;fDr;ksa rFkk vkanksyu esa ;ksxnku djus okys vU; O;fDr;ksa dk
p;u lykgdkj ifj’kn~ dh vuq”kalk ij fd;k tk ldsxkA p;fur
O;fDr;ksa dks iz”kfLr i= ,oa izrhd fpUg fn;k tk ldsxkA
3- ,sls lsukuh ftUgksua s vkosnu ugha fn;k gS fdUrq lykgdkj ifj’kn~
dh utj esa Kkr lsukuh gSa] mUgsa Hkh ifj’kn~ dh vuq”kalk ij
izLrkfor lqfo/kk nsus dh is”kd”k dh tk ldsxhA
4- jkT; ljdkj }kjk xfBr ßlykgdkj ifj’kn~ß vkSfpR;iw.kZ dkj.kksa ls
nsj ls lefiZr djus okys vkosnd ds nkos ,oa ftu yksxksa us
vkosnu i= fofgr vof/k esa lefiZr fd;k gS] muds }kjk mBk;h
x;h vkifŸk;ksa ds fuLrkj ,oa ,rn~ laca/kh vU; leL;kvksa ds
funku gsrq vkxs dk;Z dj ldsxhA
vkns”k fn;k tkrk gS fd bl ladYi dh izfrfyfi
lykgdkj ifj’kn~ ds v/;{k@lnL;ksa dks lwpuk ,oa vko”;d dkjZokbZ
gsrq vxzlkfjr fd;k tk; ,oa ladYi dks jktdh; xtV ds 3
lk/kkj.k vad esa izdkf”kr fd;k tk;A bldh izfr;ka lHkh foHkkx] lHkh
foHkkxk/;{k ,oa lHkh ftyk inkf/kdkjh@izeaMyh; vk;qDr dks lwpukFkZ
Hksth tk;A
Taking note of the submission that the

relief is confined only to Clause-I of the memo, we

are of the opinion that it is a fit case where the State
3

may be directed to file a supplementary counter

affidavit indicating the guidelines which arrive at for

such classification with reference to Clause-I of the

memo.

Let a copy of the order be handed over to

the learned Government Pleader who is appearing on

behalf of the State for onward transmission.

Post these matters after “Makar Sankranti”

retaining its position.

(T. Meena Kumari, J.)

(Vikash Jain, J.)
P.K.