RAM PRASANN SINGH Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this writ application, the petitioner has prayed for quashing : (i) the notification No. 5265, dated 1.10.2003 (Annexure -2) issued by the Department of Forest & Environment, Government of Jharkhand, whereby the promotion given to the petitioner to the post of Forest Range Officer with effect from 9.11.1993 has been sought to be shifted and made effective from 23.10.1999 (ii) the Office Order No. 66, dated 6.11.2003 (Annexure -1) issued by the respondent No. 3 pursuant to the said order (Annexure -2) shifting the date of promotion from 9.11.1993 to 22.10.1999 and for quashing the letter No. 30, dated 21.1.2004 (Annexure -3) issued by the respondent No. 3 whereby the difference of amount given to the petitioner as promotional benefits since the date of promotion with effect from 9.11.1993 has been sought to be recovered out of the amount of the leave encashment payable to the petitioner, after his retirement. The petitioner has also prayed for a direction to the respondents to make payment of all his retiral dues including the leave encashment amount on the basis of last pay drawn by him.

(2.) THE petitioner 'scase is that he was appointed as Forest Guard on 4.4.1965. In course of his service, he was promoted to the post of Forest Range Officer by notification No. 6064, dated 9.11.1993 issued by the Department of Forest and Environment, Government of Bihar. The petitioner attained the age of superannuation and retired on 31.1.2001 from the post of Forest Range Officer. After his retirement, retiral benefits were paid to the petitioner, such as gratuity, provident fund and the pension. Long after his retirement, the petitioner received office order No. 36, dated 6.11.2003 whereby his date of promotion has been sought to be shifted and modified from 9.11.1993 to 22.10.1999. It was mentioned that by notification No. 5265, dated 1.10.2003 issued by the Department of Forest & Environment, Government of Jharkhand a decision was taken to alter the date of the petitioner 'spromotion from 9.11.1993 to 22.10.1999. The petitioner was, thereafter, served with letter No. 30, dated 21.1.2004 (Annexure -3) issued by the respondent No.

(3.) THE short question, which arises for consideration in this writ application is, as to whether any payment made after giving promotion to the petitioner without any mis -representation or fraud committed by him can be recovered from his retiral dues.