KISTO RAM Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THROUGH this writ application prayer has been made to direct the respondent to grant the scale of senior selection grade and also to pay the arrears of salary and pension after revision of the last pay in the light of 6th pay revision committee recommendation. Further prayer is to quash the order as contained in memo No. 101 dated 22.10.2003 (Annexure 5/1) whereby respondent No. 4 has refused to grant monetary benefit in terms of the recommendation made by 6th pay revision committee and also to quash the order as contained in memo No. 122 dated 9.9.2006 (Annexure 5) intimating therein that apart from Rs. 64162/ - payable on account of gratuity, earned leave and bonus, nothing remains due to be paid to the petitioner.

(2.) LEARNED Counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was appointed on class IV post in Deoghar District Board on 28.7.1964 and was paid revised salary in terms of the recommendation made by 4th pay revision committee and 5th pay revision committee after the recommendations were accepted by the State Government. In due course, the petitioner retired on 31.8.2002 on his superannuation after rendering almost 38 years of service. When retiral dues were not paid, petitioner moved to this Court, vide W.P.(S) No. 2203 of 2003 which was disposed of by this Court by directing the respondent No. 4 to decide the issue and make payment of the retiral benefit admissible to the petitioner within a period of three months but the respondent in utter disregard to the order of this Court, when did not pass order regarding payment of the retiral dues, a contempt proceeding was initiated before this Court and thereupon respondent made certain payment of Rs. 64,162/ - which was part of the retiral dues. However, the contempt case was dropped but liberty was given to the petitioner to represent the matter before the respondent No. 4 regarding his grievance for non -payment of other dues. Accordingly, the petitioner made representation before the respondent No. 4, who passed the order as contained in memo No. 122 dated 9.9.2006 (Annexure 5) intimating that the petitioner is not entitled more than Rs. 64,162/ - which has already been paid.

(3.) COUNTER affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondents wherein it has been stated that the petitioner has already been paid a sum of Rs. 64.162/ -. Apart from that, nothing is due to the petitioner and that the petitioner is not entitled to the benefit of the recommendation of the 6th pay revision committee as the petitioner was not State Government employee, rather was the employee of the Zila Parishad which is an Autonomous Body and it was never given adequate grant or loan and hence the financial position of the Zila Parishad is so weak that it is unable to pay salary or other allowances in terms of the recommendation of the 6th pay revision committee. Moreover, Zila Parishad, Deoghar has to disburse the salaries to its employees as per allotment sanctioned and under that situation, it is not possible for the Zila Parishad to give benefit in terms of the 6th pay revision committee. In this regard it has further been highlighted that authorities of the Zila Parishad has been warned not to give any benefit in terms of the recommendation of the 6th pay revision committee unless it gets approval of the State Government and still the State Government has not accorded approval of the proposal sent to the Government under letter Nos. 98 dated 26.9.2003 and 74 dated 19.6.2003 and as such, the petitioner is not entitled to any relief.