LAWS(JHAR)-2009-1-77

MD. SIKANDAR ANSARI Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

Decided On January 29, 2009
Md. Sikandar Ansari Appellant
V/S
STATE OF JHARKHAND Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PRAYER in this writ application is for a direction to the respondents to pay to the petitioner the entire retiral dues with interest and also to pay the consequential benefits of the first time bound promotion on the basis of the fixation made on 29.6.2004. A further prayer has been made to extend the benefits of second time bound promotion on the petitioner's completing 24 years of service. A further prayer has been made for a direction to pay the entire dues alongwith statutory interest and to give break up of the payments made.

(2.) THE petitioner was employed as Amin under the Land Revenue Department of the State of Bihar in 1957. The said Department was subsequently merged with the Soil Conservation Department. Through, by order of the Deputy Commissioner, Dhanbad, the petitioner was dismissed from services on 8.3.1969, but the order of his dismissal from service was quashed by the Appellate Authority on 30.3.1977. Thereafter, he was reinstated in service. The petitioner submitted his representation demanding payment of back wages for the period he was kept out of service. In spite of the quashing of the order of his dismissal, the respondents have though reinstated the petitioner in service, but had declared that he was reappointed with effect from the date of his joining. The petitioner challenged the aforesaid order filing a writ application before the Patna High Court and had obtained an order against the respondents for payment of the entire back wages and all legally payable dues to him. A direction was given to the petitioner by the Patna High Court vide order dated 17.7.1995 passed in CWJC No. 2223 of 1994(R) to collect the amount of Rs. 16,685.20 from the Treasury which was deposited by the respondents in his account.

(3.) MRS . M.M. Pal, learned counsel for the petitioner, while referring to para -14 of the writ application, submits that the benefits of first and second time bound promotion had already been extended to a person who is junior to the petitioner.