BINDESHWAR KUMAR Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Mr. Navin Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners, Mr. M. K. Roy, learned counsel for the Respondent Nos. 3 and 4, J.C. to S.C. II for the Respondent -State of Jharkhand and learned counsel for the Respondent No. 5.

(2.) PETITIONERS in this writ application has prayed for the following reliefs: -

(3.) FROM the counter affidavit of the Respondent Nos. 3 and 4, and as explained by the learned counsel for the Respondent Nos. 3 and 4, it appears that there is no dispute to the fact that petitioners were initially employed under the Bihar Council on Science and Technology. Subsequent to the bifurcation of the erstwhile State of Bihar, the services of the petitioners were allocated to the Jharkhand cadre and they are presently working under the Government of Jharkhand in the Jharkhand Council on Science and Technology. Regarding the petitioners' claim for the revision of the petitioners salary in accordance with the recommendations of the 05th Pay Revision committee, it is explained in the counter affidavit that even though the petitioners may be entitled to the revision of the payscales but the specific amounts of the revised pay -scales could not be ascertained and fixed in absence of the service records of the individual petitioners, which was lying with the concerned authorities of the Bihar Council on Science and Technology. After much efforts, the service books pertaining to the petitioners have been received and the assessment for the revised payscales to be fixed in respect of the petitioners is in process. Regarding the claim for increment in salary, it is explained that the details of the increments, if any, paid to the petitioners while they were employed under the Bihar Council on Science and Technology Department, have also to be looked into together with the necessary particulars in the service books of the petitioners, which were all along in the custody of the District Project Officer of Gumla, Lohardaga and Ranchi and since the same has now been received they are now being scrutinized for necessary assessment in respect of the increments to be paid to the individual writ petitioners. As regards the petitioners' claim for deposit of the arrears of the provident fund amount and the current deductions towards provident fund in the transferred provident fund account, it is contended by the Respondents that the amount, which was earlier deducted from the salary of the petitioners by their employers in Bihar, has not been transferred to the Department in Jharkhand as yet and unless, the earlier deducted amounts are received, the total deductions, which are being continuously made from the salary of the petitioners, cannot be deposited in the transferred provident fund account of the individual petitioners. Learned counsel for the Respondent nos. 3 and 4 submits therefore, that a direction in this regard needs to be given to the Respondent No. 5 for immediate transfer of the entire amount of the deductions made from the salary of the petitioners to their provident fund account to enable the entire amounts of provident fund accumulations to be deposited in the transferred account of the petitioners. Learned counsel assures that the monthly deductions from the salary of the petitioners towards the provident fund are presently being kept in a separate account in order to ensure that none of the petitioners would suffer any detriment by way of loss of interest on the deposited amount.