2025:JHHC:29168 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P (S). No. 6190 of 2018 ------- Ramdayal Yadav, aged 66 years, son of late Ram Awatar Yadav, resident of Bishunpur, P.O. B-Polytechnic, P.S. & District Dhanbad. ……….. Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand. 2. The Secretary, Revenue and Land Reforms Department, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi, Project Building, P.O. Dhurwa, P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi. 3. The Deputy Secretary, Revenue and Land Reforms Department, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi, Project Building, P.O. Dhurwa, P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi. ……….. Respondents ---- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN For the Petitioner : Ms. J. Mazumdar, Advocate Ms. Neeharika Roy Mazumdar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Rituraj, AC to SC-VI ---- 08/ 18.09.2025 The instant writ application has been preferred by the petitioner for quashing the office order No.09/Survey MACP-64/11- 15/Survey, Ranchi dated 10.01.2014, issued under the signature of the Deputy Secretary, Revenue and Land Reforms Department, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi, so far it relates to the petitioner, whereby the 1st Financial Up gradation (1st ACP) benefit granted to the petitioner, has been cancelled and an order has been passed for recovery of the amount paid pursuant to grant of said 1st financial up gradation. 2. The brief facts relevant for adjudicating the instant application are that the petitioners were appointed against class-IV post and he gave his joining on 18.08.1977 and thereafter promoted to the post of Moharrir and retired from the said post on 31.12.2011. 3. It is further stated that similarly situated employees moved before the Patna High Court against the order of reversion which was registered as CWJC No.3167 of 1992(R) and CWJC No.1145 of 1997(R). The issue before the Court was the legality of the promotion of the 4th grade employees to the post of Moharrir and the cancellation of the said promotion to the post of Moharrir was under challenge. 2025:JHHC:29168 2 4. The said writ application was disposed of by the Patna High Court vide its order dated 24.08.1999 wherein the Patna Court at para 17 & 18 has held as under: “17. In the facts and circumstances, I feel that the respondents should not be allowed to disturb the petitioners from the post of Moharrir and at best they can treat the orders of promotion to the post of Moharrir as recruitment/appointment to the post of Moharrir; the procedure and recommendation of the Establishment Committee having been followed. 18. For the reasons aforesaid, I set aside the impugned order dated 5th September, 1992 and the order dated 22nd March, 1997, as enclosed with CWJC No.3167 of 1992(R) and CWJC No.1145 of 1997(R) and allow both the writ petitions. However, in the facts and circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as to costs.” 5. Thereafter, on 10.01.2014, an Order has been issued as contained in Annexure- 2 to the writ application, whereby the Deputy Secretary, Revenue and Land Reforms Department cancelled the grant of 1st ACP of the petitioner. The said notification has been impugned in the instant writ application and the name of the petitioner appears at Sl. No. 11 page 30. 6. A similar writ application was filed by similarly situated persons challenging the order dated 19.10.2012 being W.P.(S). No.7625 of 2012 and this Court has allowed the writ application by observing and holding at para 6 & 7 as under: “6. Be that as it may, having gone through the rival submissions of the parties, this Court is of the considered view that order dated 19.10.2012 (Annexure-2) is not tenable in the eyes of law. The petitioners have already received the monetary benefits of 1st ACP vide Annexure -1 to the writ petition, after due consideration by the competent authority. As the petitioners are 3rd grade employees and have already been superannuated, no order of recovery could have been passed after their retirement. The matter has been set at rest in catena of decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and that of Hon'ble Jharkhand High Court that any order visiting civil consequences cannot be passed without adhering the principles of natural justice. The Hon'ble Apex Court in case of State of Punjab Vs. Rafiq Masih (white washer) etc. reported in (2015) 4 SCC 334 has clearly laid a guideline which forbids the recovery from Class- III and Class-IV employees after lapse of considerable time. 7. As a cumulative effect of the aforesaid rules, guidelines, observations and judicial pronouncements, the order dated 19.10.2012 (Annexure-2) is hereby quashed and set aside.” 7. In yet another case being W.P.(S) No. 99 of 2013, the widows of two similarly situated employees filed writ application against the order dated 19.10.2012 whereby 1st ACP was cancelled which was 2025:JHHC:29168 3 granted to their deceased husband and the said writ application was also allowed in favour of the widows. 8. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the case of the petitioner squarely stands on the similar footing and both the writ applications being WP(S) No.7625 of 2012 and WPS No.99 of 2013 as also W.P.(S). No. 873 of 2013 and impugned orders, as far as it relates to those petitioners were quashed and set aside and the petitioners of those cases were held to be entitled for death-cum-retiral benefits on the last scale drawn taking into account the grant of benefits of 1st ACP to the respective petitioners. 9. In absence of any counter-affidavit, learned counsel for the respondents is not in a position to controvert the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner. However, he fairly submits that if the case of petitioner is similar to the petitioners of the above referred cases, he is also entitled for similar benefits. 10. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after going through the materials available on record, the only ground which has been taken by the respondents for cancellation of 1st ACP of the petitioner is that the promotions have been granted to him i.e. Class- III post of Moharrir. However, the said ground/issue has already been settled in the judgment referred to herein above wherein the Patna High Court at para 17 of its order dated 24.08.1999 has directed the respondents not to disturb the order of promotion to the post of Moharrir and at best they can treat the orders of promotion to the post of Moharrir as recruitment/appointment to the post of Moharrir. 11. From the record it also appears that the endorsement to that effect were also made in the service book of the petitioner which is not denied by the respondents. Further, no opportunity of hearing or show cause was granted to the petitioner before passing the impugned order. 12. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, and the judgments referred to herein above, the impugned order so far it relates to the petitioner does not have any legs to stand and the same is quashed and set aside. Consequently, the petitioner would be entitled 2025:JHHC:29168 4 for all retiral benefits on the last scale drawn taking into account the grant of benefits of 1st ACP to the petitioner. The Respondents are directed to give all consequential benefits to the petitioner, in terms of aforesaid order. 13. It is made clear that the entire exercise shall be completed within a period of four months from the date of receipt/production of copy of this order. 14. With the aforesaid observation and directions, the instant application is allowed. (Deepak Roshan, J.) 18th September, 2025 Kunal