BACHCHU PRASAD SINHA Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the parties.

(2.) Petitioner has approached this Court with a prayer for quashing the letter contained in memo No. 1242 dated 13.04.2018 (Annexure-1), issued by respondent No. 2, by which the increment granted to the petitioner w.e.f. 27.06.1987 to 31.07.2017 has been cancelled and the benefits granted to the petitioner w.e.f. 09.08.1999 has been withdrawn and the pay-scale of the petitioner has been fixed in the basic grade due to non-passing of Hindi Noting and Drafting Examination. Petitioner has also prayed for quashing the recovery order dated 13.04.2018 (Annexure-1/1). It has also been prayed to immediately and forthwith pay the retiral benefits to the petitioner such as, P.F. Leave Encashment, Group Insurance, etc.

(3.) The factual exposition as has been delineated in the writ petition is that the petitioner joined his services on 27.06.1986 to the post of Pharmacist in pursuance to memo No. 896 dated 26.06.1986. Thereafter, he has been performing his duty to the full satisfaction of all concerned and has retired from the said post on 31.07.2017. It is the further case of the petitioner that he joined the post of Pharmacist in the pay-scale of Rs.680-965 and subsequently, the same was revised to Rs.1320-2040. Thereafter, the petitioner was granted revised pay-scale of Rs.4500-7000 w.e.f. 01.01.1996 and was granted the benefits of 1st ACP w.e.f. 09.08.1999. Thereafter, after implementation of 6th pay revision, the pay-scale of the petitioner was again revised and fixed in the scale of Rs.9300-34800 (G.P. 4200) w.e.f. 01.01.2006. It is the specific case of the petitioner that as he has not cleared the Hindi Noting and Drafting Examination during his entire service period, the respondent No. 3, after retirement of the petitioner, has issued a direction to cancel the enhanced pay-scale granted to the petitioner and has also directed for recovery of the excess payment made to the petitioner. In light of the said direction, the enhanced pay-scale granted to the petitioner for the period from 27.06.1987 to 31.07.2017 has been cancelled and accordingly, his pay-scale has been fixed in the basic grade, which is evident from letter dated 13.04.2018, issued by respondent No. 2. Consequently, the recovery order has also been issued by respondent No. 2 on 13.04.2018. Challenging the aforesaid malafide action of the respondents in fixing the pay-scale of the petitioner in the basic grade and also issuing order for recovery of the excess payments made, the petitioner has preferred this writ application.