2025:JHHC:25994 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(S) No. 1117 of 2014 1. Ram Bilash Ram, Son of Late Banarsi Ram, resident A/17 A.G. Colony, P.O. Ashiyana Nagar patna. At Present resident of Dumka P.O. & P.S. Dumka, District Dumka. 2.Surendra Prasad, son of Late Jagat Sahu resident of Piska more, Ratu Road, P.O. Hesal, P.S. Sukhdeonagar, District Ranchi. 3. Tej Narayan Tiwari son of late Hanuman Tiwari resident of Mahatma Gandhi Path near Head Post office, B.B. Ghosh Lane, Bhagalpur at present Resident Babudih, P.O & P.S. Sadar, District Dhanbad 4. Binod Kumar Singh son of late Awadhesh Prasad Singh Resident Qrt. N.L5-47 Agrico Road No.1 P.O. Agrico, P.S. Sidhgora, District East Singhbhum, Jamshedpur. 5. Rambir Singh son of Late Ramdas Singh, Resident of Namkum P.O. Namkum P.S. Namkum, District Ranchi 6. Ram Krishna Kumar Sinha son of Late Jagdayal Sinha, Resident of Flat No. 202 Shri Krishna Apartment Shukla Colony P.O. Hinoo P.S. Doranda district Ranchi. 7. Rejendra Prasad Choudhary son of Sri Jaganath....Ram Resident of Officers. Qrt No.3 Govt. Bus Stand. P.O. P.S. Chutia, District Ranchi ... … Petitioner(s) Versus 1.The State of Jharkhand through the Principal Secretary, Department of Transport Government of Jharkhand, F.F.P. Building P.O. & P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi. 2. Principal Secretary, Finance Department Government of Jharkhand, Project Building, P.O. & P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi. 3. Joint Transport Commissioner, Department of Transport F.F. Building P.O. & P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi. 4. Member Board of Revenue Government of Jharkhand P.O. & P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi. … … Respondent(s) CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Arpan Mishra, Advocate For the Respondent(s) : Mr. Mithilesh Singh, GA-IV -------- Order No. 25/Dated: 28th August 2025 Though the petitioners in the instant writ application have initially prayed for several reliefs but in view of the development and 2025:JHHC:25994 2 several orders passed in several writ applications in a case of similarly situated employees, learned counsel for the petitioner confines his argument only on the contention that services of the petitioners should be notionally considered from the date of 01.01.1996. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners draws attention of this Court towards the supplementary affidavit filed on 21.08.2025 and submits that the instant writ application may be disposed of in the light of paragraph nos. 7 to 12 made in the supplementary affidavit. For brevity paragraph nos. 7 to 12 are extracted as under: “7. That the Hon'ble Court vide order dated 19.12.2019 has categorically held at paragraph-21 that the petitioners are entitled for pension taking into consideration the past service rendered by them and further it was directed that the benefits accruing to the petitioners by virtue of their earlier services be also given to them. 8. That the Department has placed the petitioners in the pay scale of Rs. 3050-4590 with effect from 01.07.2004. The petitioners were placed in the initial pay of the lowest scale. 9. That the Hon'ble Court vide order dated 03.11.2023 has held at paragraph-5 the following: "5. On perusal of the order dated 19.12.2019 passed in W.P.(S) No. 277 of 2018 and other analogous cases particularly paragraph no. 21 of the same, it is evidently clear that pension of the petitioners was required to be fixed taking into consideration the past services rendered by them, meaning thereby that if they were having particular salary structure when their services were placed in the State of Jharkhand, the said salary structure was to continue with addition of increment (if any), till they retired from service." 10. That the petitioners state that after the order dated 03.11.2023 was passed by the Hon'ble Court, the petitioners were placed under the pay scale of Rs. 4500-7000/- (with respect to two petitioners) and Rs. 5,000- 8000/- (with respect to four petitioners) w.e.f. 01.07.2004. With respect to four petitioners, they should be granted pay scale of Rs. 5500-9000/- and after the promotion granted in the year 2005 the scale of the petitioners should be placed under Rs. 6500-10200 and Rs. 8000-13500/-. After Vith P.R.C. the scale of the petitioners should be placed under Rs. 9300-34800/- with Grade Pay of Rs. 4800/- and in the scale of Rs. 9300-34800/- with Grade Pay of Rs. 5400/-. The petitioners retired in the year 2015. 11. That the benefits accruing to the petitioners by virtue of their earlier services also includes Earned Leave, Gratuity, A.C.P., M.A.C.P. and Pension. 12. That pursuant to the order passed by the Hon'ble High Court the Department has not fix the pay in terms of the order passed by Hon'ble High Court. In the Service Book the pay fixation has been done by taking the date as 01.07.2004 and further pay fixation has been done by treating the date to be 01.07.2004. The period from 01.01.1996 (Vth P.R.C.) to 01.01.2006 (VIth P.R.C.) after counting the said period notionally and granting increment notionally has not been taken into account for grant of promotion, A.C.P./M.A.C.P. benefits and the consequent pay fixation has not been 2025:JHHC:25994 3 done.” Emphasis Supplied 3. Learned counsel for the respondents does not object to the limited argument of the petitioner. 4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after going through the documents available on record, it appears that the Jharkhand State Non-Gazette Employees Federation and other employees has filed a writ petition being W.P.(S) No. 277 of 2018 with a similar relief. The writ petition was tagged along with other matters and by an order dated 19.12.2019 the writ petitions were allowed in the following terms:- “9) Having gone through the rival submissions of the parties, this Court is of the considered view that no interference is warranted in these writ petitions save and except that the past service of the petitioners can be considered for pension for the following facts and reasons:- (i) The petitioners had earlier approached this Court in W.P. (S) No.2115 of 2015 with the same prayer for granting the benefit of pay revision as per 5th Pay Revision Commission's report with effect from 01.01.1997 and 6th Pay Revision Commission's report with effect from 01.01.2006 with all consequential benefits and also for payment of arrears of salary and difference of retiral benefits arising out of revision of pay scale, such as, gratuity, leave encashment, etc." ...................................................................................................................... ..................................................................................................................... 21) As a sequitur of the aforesaid rules, guidelines and judicial pronouncements, I am of the considered opinion that the petitioners are entitled for pension taking into consideration the past service rendered by them. Benefits accruing to the petitioners by virtue of their earlier services be also given to them within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 22) The writ petitions are allowed to the extent above.” Emphasis Supplied 5. Thereafter, the petitioners in W.P.(S) No. 277 of 2018 with analogous cases had filed a contempt case being Contempt Case (Civil) No. 382 of 2020. The aforesaid case was tagged along with other matters and by an order dated 03.11.2023 this Court at paragraph no.5 has observed as under: “5. On perusal of the order dated 19.12.2019 passed in W.P.(S) No. 277 of 2018 and other analogous cases particularly paragraph no. 21 of the same, it is evidently clear that pension of the petitioners was required to be fixed taking into consideration the past services rendered by them, meaning 2025:JHHC:25994 4 thereby that if they were having particular salary structure when their services were placed in the State of Jharkhand, the said salary structure was to continue with addition of increment (if any), till they retired from service.” 6. By an order dated 13.01.2025, Contempt Case (Civil) No. 382 of 2020 was disposed of in the following terms: “7. Time and again, these cases have been listed and only on the pretext that the entire benefits in terms of order dated 19.12.2019, passed in W.P.(S). No.277 of 2018, particularly Paragraph No. 21 thereof, has not been extended, cases were taken up on several occasions and were adjourned for compliance. 8. From perusal of the show-cause/affidavit filed by the State and the submission of Principal Secretary of the Department before this Court in presence of learned Advocate General and learned Additional Advocate General, it appears that State is also ready to pay the benefits as admitted by the Principal Secretary himself. Very honestly and candidly, the State has come out with show cause/affidavit clearly mentioning therein that all the benefits as per entitlements and in terms of order and direction of the Court, shall be extended to the petitioners but from the date of their absorption i.e. 01.07.2004 of the employees of the Transport Department. 9. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties at length, this Court had passed the order which has been affirmed up to the Hon'ble Apex Court. The specific observation of this Court was never interfered by the Hon'ble Apex Court to the effect that "petitioners are entitled for pension taking into consideration the past service rendered by them. Benefits accruing to the petitioners by virtue of their earlier services be also given to them within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order". The other contentions regarding ACP and MACP benefits, increments and leave encashment etc. has to be paid to the petitioners as they are entitled for the same. Admittedly, nowhere it was mentioned by this Court that they are entitled for the benefits from a particular cut-off date. Cut of date fixed by the respondents regarding calculation of the arears is in complete contravention of the order passed by this Court which itself is contemptuous. This Court, while passing the order, never fixed any cut-off date rather, this Court was of the considered view that they are entitled for the past services as reflected at paragraph-21 of the Judgment dated 19.12.2019 (quoted hereinabove). The order of this Court was further clarified by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court while sitting over the contempt matters on 03.11.2023, which reads as under: "5. On perusal of the order dated 19.12.2019, passed in W.P.(S) No. 277 of 2018 and other analogous cases, particularly paragraph no. 21 of the same, it is evidently clear that pension of the petitioners was required to be fixed taking into consideration the past services rendered by them, meaning thereby that if they were having particular salary structure when their services were placed in the State of Jharkhand, the said salary structure was to continue with addition of increment (if any), till they retired from service." 10. From perusal of the Judgment dated 19.12.2019 passed in W.P.(S). No. 277 of 2018 and other analogous cases, particularly Paragraph No. 21 thereof, it is evidently clear that pension of the petitioners was required to be fixed taking into consideration the past services rendered by them. 2025:JHHC:25994 5 Meaning thereby. If they were having particular salary structure and when their services were placed in the State of Jharkhand, the said salary structure was to be continued with addition of increments, if any, till they are retired. The same was never disputed at any point of time by the State. 11. In view of the show-cause/affidavit filed by the State, it is evident that they had agreed to grant the benefits to the petitioners, though notionally, for the periods prior to absorption i.e. 01.07.2004. Since already order has been passed by this Court and has also been clarified, no further clarification is needed. This Court is of the view that out of sheer confusion, the matter is lingering for long and the same should have a happy ending in view of submission of the officer present in the Court, show-cause/affidavit filed today as well as submission advanced by the learned Advocate General. 12. Since these contempt matters have been lingering in this Court since long i.e. from the year 2020 and earlier the writ was also pending before this Court and the same travelled up to the Hon'ble Supreme Court, it would be apposite to direct the Opposite Parties State to clear the entire dues which the petitioners are entitled for as per their own averments and as per the direction of this Court. 13. The views expressed by this Court is also agreed upon by the learned counsel representing petitioners as well as the State. In the circumstances, these contempt proceedings are hereby dropped with a direction to the State to release entire benefits, in terms of order and direction of the Court, within a period of 12 weeks from the date of receipt/presentation of a copy of this order.” Emphasis Supplied 7. Thus, it appears that this Court vide order dated 19.12.2019 passed in W.P(S) No. 277 of 2018 with analogous cases at paragraph no. 21 has held that petitioners are entitled for pension taking into consideration the past services rendered by them and further directed that the benefits accruing to the petitioners by virtue of their earlier services be also given to them. Thereafter, the concerned respondent placed the petitioners in the pay scale of Rs. 3050-4590/- with effect from 01.07.2004. It further appears that in the contempt proceeding this Court vide order dated 03.11.2023 has held at paragraph no. 5 as under: “5. On perusal of the order dated 19.12.2019 passed in W.P.(S) No. 277 of 2018 and other analogous cases particularly paragraph no.21 of the same, it is evidently clear that pension of the petitioners was required to be fixed taking into consideration the past services rendered by them, meaning thereby that if they were having particular salary structure when their services were placed in the State of Jharkhand, the said salary structure was to continue with addition of increment (if nay), till they retired from service.” 8. Pursuant to the order passed in contempt case, the petitioners were placed under the pay scale of Rs, 4500-7000/- with respect to two 2025:JHHC:25994 6 petitioners and Rs. 5000-8000/- with respect to four petitioners with effect from 01.07.2004. 9. Thus, this Court finds that pursuant to the order passed in several litigations reference of which has been given hereinabove, the department has not fixed the pay in terms of the order passed by this Court. In service book the pay fixation has been done by taking the date as 01.07.2004 and further pay fixation has been done by treating the date to be 01.07.2004. Thus, the benefit prior to absorption has not been given and, accordingly, the period from 01.01.1996 (5th PRC) to 01.01.2006 (6th PRC) after counting the said period notionally and after granting increment notionally the promotion/ACP/MACP benefit shall be granted to these petitioners and consequently pay fixation shall be done. The entire exercise shall be completed within a period of 16 weeks from the date of receipt/production of copy of this order. 10. The instant writ application stands disposed of. 11. Pending, I.As., if any, also stand disposed of. (Deepak Roshan, J.) Amit N.A.F.R