DEEPAK KUMAR Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) The instant writ application has been preferred by the petitioner praying therein for the following reliefs:

(3.) Mr. Rajendra Krishna, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was appointed as Probationary Development Officer vide letter dtd. 9/5/2011 (Annexure-1) bearing reference no JDO/MKTG issued under the signature of Senior Divisional Manager with effect from 15. 05.2011 wherein petitioner was posted at headquarters at Chhota Govindpur and the area of operation was Jamshedpur Branch. He submits that the appointment letter dated 9. 05.2011 of the petitioner shall be governed specifically by the terms and conditions of the Life Insurance Corporation of India (Staff) Regulation, 1960 as amended from time to time. The appointment of the petitioner was confirmed vide letter dated 15. 05.2013 (Annexure-2) and the w.e.f 1/6/2013 the basic pay scale of the petitioner was Rs.12,235.00 per month and it was informed to the petitioner that all the other allowances corresponding to this basic pay would be as per rule. He further submits that vide show cause notice dtd. 30/11/2015 (Annexure-3) being reference no. JDO/Sales issued under the provisions contained in sub-rule (1) of Rule 6 of the Life Insurance Corporation of India (Revision of Certain Terms and Conditions of Services) Rules, 2009 (rule under challenge) directed the petitioner to file its written reply/ representation within 15 days from the date of receipt of this letter. The petitioner represented before the Senior Divisional Manager of LIC at Jamshedpur and filed his detailed reply dtd. 14/12/2015 (Annexure-4 & 4/1) to the show cause dtd. 30/11/2015 and further stated that he had successfully achieved his target for the 1st year but in 2nd year petitioner fell short because petitioner's father was seriously ill and was suffering from Cancer and for the treatment for his father he had gone to Vellore where his father was admitted for treatment. The petitioner sought time for setting his own target so that he would able to comply and achieve the target as per rules, 2009.