Baidya Nath Mandal vs State Of Jharkhand And Ors

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

The present writ petition has been filed for following reliefs.

i. For direction to the respondents to make payment of gratuity to the petitioner from the date of his joining i.e., from 16.01.1976 alongwith interest in view of Memo No.589 dated 14.06.1994 of the Deputy Secretary, Revenue and Land Reforms, Govt. of Bihar whereby the Government had decided to give time bound promotion reckoning the service period from the date of appointment.

ii. For direction to grant the benefit of Pay Revision to the petitioner from 01.01.1996 with interest on the basis of the pay scale 1200-4000 which the petitioner was drawing from 16.01.1986, the date of petitioner's time bound promotion.

iii. For quashing the revised Pay Fixation of the petitioner contained in Memo No.38 dated 10.07.2001 whereby the Respondents have wrongly and illegally fixed is Pay Revision on the basis of the Scale of 3050-4590 instead of fixing the pay revision on the basis of the Scale of 4000-6000.

iv. The respondents be directed to grant handicapped conveyance allowance to the petitioner at the rate of Rs.300/- per month from 01.01.2000 alongwith interest being double the amount of Rs.150/- paid to the petitioner since 1993 pursuant to the direction of the Finance Department, Govt. of Bihar contained in letter dated 30.10.2000.

v. For any other relief or reliefs be granted to which the petitioner may be deemed entitled.

The brief facts regarding the service of the petitioner is that he had been appointed to the post of Copyist in the District Record Room and accordingly he joined on the said post on 16.01.1976 and had worked as a Remuneration Copyist from 16.01.1976 to 07.07.1980. In pursuance of Letter No.1381/Rev. dated 08.07.1980, petitioner had been declared as Government servant and accordingly he had worked in the said service till the age of retirement i.e. 28.02.2002.

So far as, prayer No.1 is concerned, the petitioner has claimed gratuity calculating his service from the date of joining as a Remuneration Clerk i.e. 16.01.1976. It is admitted position that Remuneration Clerk is not a Government Employee. Gratuity and pension has to be calculated on the strength of pensionable length of service as mandated under the Jharkhand Pension Rules.

Admittedly, petitioner entered into the Government service on 08.07.1980 and as such he is entitled for calculation of his service for the purpose of gratuity w.e.f. 08.07.1980 only.

In view of the above fact, so far as prayer No.1 is concerned, the petitioner is not entitled for any relief.

So far as prayer No.2 is concerned, petitioner has sought for pay revision in the pay scale of Rs.1200-4000 w.e.f. 01.01.1996 as a replacement scale.

For the first time in the 5th pay revision, the pay scale has been attached to the post and there has been no replacement pay scale to a pay scale, rather replacement pay scale has been attached to the post. In that way the benefit of time bound promotion given to an employee stand extinguished. The employee, whether he got time bound promotion or not, has been placed in the single pay scale, as per the substantive post.

Replacing the time bound scheme, assured carrier progress scheme had been introduced and as such the first up-gradation is given as per the ACP scheme and it is not a third up-gradation as because the earlier two up-gradation granted in the name of time bound promotion stands withdrawn due to clubbing the pay scale with the post.

In earlier pay revision, the replacement pay scale was referable to the pay scale not to the post.

Thus, the claim of the petitioner for grant of replacement pay scale on the ground of pay scale w.e.f 01.01.1996 is not admissible. Accordingly, the same is, hereby, rejected.

Prayer No.3 is regarding the pay fixation. The basis is the same as discussed above and accordingly, the petitioner is not entitled for this relief also.

So far as prayer No.4 is concerned regarding the payment of Rs.300/- per month as handicapped conveyance allowance on the basis of Letter dated 30.10.2000.

Counter affidavit has been filed in which it has been stated that earlier the conveyance allowance was Rs.150/- per month which has been granted to the petitioner.

So far as letter dated 30.10.2000 is concerned, it has been issued by the authorities of State of Bihar after bifurcation of State and as such, it is not applicable in the territory of Jharkhand and accordingly, the claim on the basis of letter of the State of Bihar is not admissible. In that view of the matter, this claim is also rejected.

In view of the above discussion, this Court finds no merit in the present writ petition. Accordingly, the same is hereby dismissed.