CHANDRA MOHAN JHA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel representing the petitioner, learned counsel representing the Union of India as also learned counsel representing the Bihar State Power Holding Company.

(2.) The petitioner is a retired IAS officer, who got an engagement by making himself available on full-time-basis with the Central Government to serve as the Chairman of the State Advisory Committee to make recommendations to the Central Government for allocation of posts and staff of the erstwhile Bihar State Electricity Board (now, Bihar State Power Holding Company) considering representations from their employees. His grievance is that while assigning him the said job it was on a full-time-basis on a fixed consolidated remuneration of Rs. 13,000/- per month and initially an order dated 06.01.2004, as contained in Annexure-1/1 & Annexure-2 to the present Writ Application, was issued; later on in partial modification of the said order dated 06.01.2004, the Ministry of Power, Govt. of India came out with an order dated 14.05.2004, as contained in Annexure-3 to the Writ Application. It is his case that vide Annexure-3, once again, the consolidated fee payable to him was fixed at Rs. 13,000/- per month in addition to his entitlement to draw his pension and reliefs thereon but in complete disregard to the earlier order dated 06.01.2004 followed by the order dated 14.05.2004, the Ministry of Power, Govt. of India issued an order dated 23.12004 (Annexure-4) by which a fresh decision has been taken to amend the terms and conditions of the engagement of the petitioner. This time the petitioner has been allowed only a one-time-lump-sum-honorarium of Rs. 60,000/-. This Annexure-4, i.e., the order dated 23.12004 fixing a lump-sum honorarium of Rs. 60,000/- has been questioned by the petitioner by filing the present Writ Application.

(3.) Learned counsel representing the petitioner submits that the fixation of lump-sum honorarium of Rs. 60,000/- vide order dated 212.2004 is a unilateral act of the Govt. of India and the order having been passed by reducing the remuneration of the petitioner without hearing him in any way is wholly illegal, arbitrary and bad in law. Learned counsel further submits that in this regard the petitioner represented vide letter no. 99 dated 20.08.2009 to the then Hon'ble Minister, Ministry of Power, Govt. of India but no decision whatsoever was taken on his representation.