AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the respondents.
Mr. Vishal Kr. Rai, J.C. to S.C. IV, seeks permission of this Court to file the supplementary counter affidavit on behalf of the respondent No.5.
Permission accorded.
Let the same be kept on record.
In paragraph-5 of the supplementary counter affidavit, it has been mentioned that the petitioner No.1 namely Dineshwar Sahu, retired on 31.01.2015 in the higher pay scale of B.A Trained 6500-10500 (Revised scale 9300-34800, Pay band-4800). He was granted higher pay scale on 14.11.2014 and all his retirement benefits have already been paid to him.
Similarly, in paragraph-6 of the supplementary counter affidavit, which has been filed today, it has been mentioned that the petitioner No.2 namely Maharo Oraon has been sanctioned B.A. Trained higher scale and he is still getting the same scale and will superannuate on 31.01.2018.
7 In paragraph-7 of the supplementary counter affidavit, it has been mentioned that the petitioner No.3 namely Smt. Ashawati Suren Ekka has retired on 31.07.2016 in pay scale of 9300-34800, Pay band- 4600. All her retirement benefits have already been paid to her.
Hence, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the respondents that this writ petition has become infructuous because the prayer has already been granted to the petitioners.
Learned counsel for the petitioners also submitted that the petitioners have received the benefits for which they have filed this writ application.
In view of this, the writ petition stands dismissed as infructuous since the prayer made in the writ application has already been fulfilled.
This writ petition stands dismissed as infructuous.