DHANANJAY KUMAR Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) COUNSEL for the petitioner is challenging the order dated 25th January, 2012, which is at Annexure 7 to the memo of the petition, passed by respondents, whereby the benefit of second Assured Career Progression given to the petitioner with effect from a particular date, has been recalled by the impugned order and therefore, present writ petition has been preferred.

(2.) COUNSEL for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was directly given benefit of second Assured Career Progression on 16th December 2004 with effect from 16th October, 2004. Thereafter, petitioner was in the service of the respondents up to 31st December, 2011 and on the said date the petitioner retired. There is neither any misrepresentation of facts on the part of the petitioner nor any fraud being played by the petitioner for getting the benefit of second Assured Career progression. The respondents, without giving any notice and without giving any opportunity to file reply, abruptly passed the impugned order, dated 25th January, 2012, which is at annexure 7 to the memo of the petition, whereby the effective date of second Assured Career Progression is changed from 16th October, 2004 to 7th July, 2008. In this connection, it is submitted by the counsel for the petitioner that had a notice been given to the petitioner, it could have been pointed out that whatever is granted to the petitioner from th October, 2004 is absolutely true and correct and in consonance with the facts and law and the new date for grant of benefit of second Assured Career Progression, i.e.7th July, 2008 is incorrect.

(3.) EXCEPT for what has been referred to hereinabove, no other argument has been canvassed by the counsel for the petitioner.