SHAILENDRA KUMAR SINHA Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In the instant writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for direction upon the respondents for giving him the benefit of upgradation in pay scale as per Assured career Progression Scheme w.e.f. 05.01.1993 up till now along with interest.

(2.) The averments, as disclosed in the writ petition, is that the petitioner was appointed as Veterinary Doctor in the department of Animal husbandry and Fisheries in the year 1981. The petitioner has been granted the benefit of 1st Time Bound Promotion after completion of 10 years of service i.e. with effect from 15.03.1991 and thereafter the said benefit has been given to the petitioner till 01.03.1996. On the recommendation of the 5th Pay Revision Committee, the benefit of the said scheme was withdrawn with effect from 01.03.1996 on the condition that the employee will be provided benefit of Assured Career Progression scheme. It has been stated that the scheme of Assured Career Progression has been given effect with effect from 09.08.1999 as evident from Annexure-1 to the writ application. It has further been stated that the petitioner is entitled to get the 1st upgradation with effect from 05.03.1993 since on the due date no criminal case or any departmental proceeding was pending. Subsequently the petitioner was put under suspension w.e.f 101999. It has been further stated that the respondents are duty bound to release the difference of arrears of salary with effect from 05.03.1993 to 01.03.1996 and thereafter the difference of arrears of salary with effect from 01.03.1996 till 101999 and also the subsistence allowance on the basis of enhanced pay scale. In this regard, petitioner has given several representations, photo copy of the representation dated 20.05.2004 is annexed as Annexure-2 to the writ petition. Further, it has been stated that the petitioner has been convicted in RC-50(A)/96 vide judgment dated 18.12008 against which the appeal is pending before this Hon'ble Court. Due to inaction of the respondents, the petitioner left with no other alternative, has approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, invoking extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court for redressal of his grievance.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has strenuously urged that the respondents are under the bounden duty to extend the benefit to Assured Career Progression scheme w.e.f. 05.01.1993 on completion of 12/24 years of continuous service from the initial date of appointment, since on the said date admittedly there was neither any proceeding nor any charge sheet was submitted against the petitioner. Learned counsel further submits that the action of the respondents in not extending the benefit of ACP amounts to violation of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India.