STATE OF JHARKHAND Vs. RAM KAILASH SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the State as none appears on behalf of the respondent.

(2.) In this letters patent appeal, appellant has assailed the order passed by learned Single Judge on 3/9/2020 in W.P.(S) No.4708 of 2009.

(3.) Petitioner before the learned Single Judge, i.e., respondent before us, had initially prayed for a direction upon the respondent-authorities to pay arrears of pay since June, 2001. During pendency of the writ petition, petitioner was discharged from service pursuant to order contained in memo No.683 dtd. 12/5/2014 (Annexure 12 to the writ petition). After such change of event, the petitioner-respondent filed an application for amendment, which was allowed by learned Single Judge and the question of his termination and legality thereof was also considered. However, after considering the matter at length, learned Single Judge came to a conclusion that the petitioner has confined his argument only to the claim for payment of salary, therefore, he did not deal with the termination order. Further, the learned Single Judge has held that since the petitioner-respondent has worked for the period under consideration, i.e., June, 2001 till his discharge, i.e., 12/5/2014, he is entitled to entire salary calculated in the light of judgment in the case of State of Punjab and Others versus Jagjit Singh and Others reported in (2017) 1 SCC 148. We find no illegality in the order passed by the learned Single Judge.