IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI.
W.P. (S) No. 4158 of 2010
...
Sephaniel Kisku ... ... Petitioner
-V e r s u s-
1. The State of Jharkhand through the Secretary, Department of Revenue,
Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi.
2. The Commissioner, Santhal Pargana Division, Dumka.
3. The Circle Officer, Sarwan Anchal, District-Deoghar.
4. The Accountant General, A & E, Ranchi. ... Respondents.
...
CORAM: - HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D.G.R. PATNAIK.
...
For the Petitioner : - Mr. Ashok Kumar Sinha, Advocate.
For the State : - J.C. to S.C. II.
For the Respondent No. 4 : - Mr. S. Shrivastava, Advocate.
...
2/16.09.2010
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel
for the Respondents and with their consent this application is disposed of at the stage
of admission.
2. Prayer of the petitioner, in this application is for a direction upon the
Respondents to pay him his entire retiral dues including the G.P.F. amount, the
arrears of salary for the period 09.08.1999 to 19.09.2001, the benefits of the 01 st and
the 02nd A.C.P. as well as the benefit of two increments for the years 1999 and 2000
and for re-fixation of his pension by way of consequential benefits of the A.C.P. and
due increments.
3. The petitioner had retired from the post of the Circle Inspector,
Sarwan Anchal in the District of Deoghar from the Revenue Department on
31.10.2009. During his tenure in office, the petitioner was put under suspension on
09.08.1999. In the writ application filed by the petitioner vide W.P. (S) No. 3719 of
2001, by order dated-10.09.2001, the order of suspension was revoked and after the
revocation, the petitioner immediately joined his service on 20.09.2001.
4. The petitioner’s grievance is that even after his retirement, he was not
paid his due salary for the period of his suspension from 09.08.1999 to 19.09.1999
and neither was he allowed two increments for the years 1999 and 2000 to which he
was entitled and he has not even been paid his retiral benefits including the G.P.F.
amount, Gratuity and leave encashment amount. It is further submitted that
demanding such payments, the petitioner had submitted his representation before the
concerned authorities of the Respondents on 29.06.2010 (Annexure-5) but till date,
the concerned authorities of the Respondents have not taken any initiative to respond
to his demand.
5. From the pleadings in the writ application, it appears that the
petitioner had retired from service under the Respondents-authorities in the
concerned Department. The petitioner is certainly entitled for payment of his retiral
dues. It is not understood as to why, despite the petitioner’s representation, the
concerned authorities of the Respondents have not taken any decision to address the
grievance of the petitioner.
6. Though the counter affidavit has not been filed, but learned counsel
for the Respondent-State is present and submits that a decision on the representation
of the petitioner is yet to be taken by the concerned authorities of the Respondents.
7. Considering the above facts and circumstances, this application is
disposed of with a direction to the concerned authorities of the Respondents to take
appropriate decision on the petitioner’s demand for payment of his retiral dues as
specified in the present writ application and also in his representation
dated-29.06.2010 (Annexure-5), within two months from the date of this order and
upon making assessment of the total amounts payable to the petitioner by way of his
retiral dues and other dues, such amounts shall be paid to the petitioner within one
month from the date of the decision taken.
(D.G.R. Patnaik, J.)
APK