SUBHASH KUMAR SINHA Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present petition has been preferred mainly challenging the order at Annexure 2 to the memo of petition, passed by Respondent No. 2 dated 15th January, 2009, whereby, both the benefits under Assured Career Progression Scheme, which were given to the Petitioner on 9th April, 1983 as well as on 9th August, 1999, have been ordered to be withdrawn and the monetary benefits, which have been given to the Petitioner, have been ordered to be refunded to the State. This order is under challenge in this writ petition mainly on the ground that Respondent No. 2 has not properly appreciated the Government 'scircular, which is at Annexure 5 to the supplementary affidavit, filed by the Petitioner or which is at Annexure C to the counter affidavit. This circular, which is dated 12th August, 1992, issued by the Finance Department, specifies that the benefit of Assured Career Progression Scheme, which was given to those Clerks prior to 1st September, 1983, cannot be withdrawn, on the ground that they have not cleared requisite examination. It is also mentioned in Clause 4(i) of the said circular that once the 1st Assured Career Progression cannot be withdrawn, then subsequent benefits of Assured Career Progression should be given to such Clerks.

(2.) LEARNED Counsel for the Petitioner has relied upon Clause 4(i) of the aforesaid circular and has submitted that the benefit, which was given to the Petitioner i.e. 1st time bound promotion on 9th April, 1983 cannot be withdrawn by the order dated 15th January, 2009 after lapse of approximately twenty five years. Similarly, the benefit of 2nd Assured Career Progression, which was given to the Petitioner on 9th August, 1999, also cannot be withdrawn after a period of ten years and that too after retirement of the present Petitioner. Moreover, no opportunity of being heard was given to the Petitioner before passing the order at Annexure 2 to the memo of petition. Had an opportunity of being heard been given to the Petitioner, the aforesaid circular would have been brought to the notice of the Respondents. There is no allegation that the Petitioner by playing fraud has received the benefits of 1st time bound promotion and 2nd time bound promotion and, as such, the benefits which have already been given in the year, 1983 and in the year, 1999 cannot be withdrawn in the year, 2009 and hence the order at Annexure 2 to the memo of petition deserves to be quashed and set aside.

(3.) HAVING heard learned Counsel for both the sides and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, I hereby quash and set aside the order, passed by Respondent No. 2 dated 15th January, 2009 at Annexure 2 to the memo of petition, mainly for the following facts and reasons: