RAJIV ASTHANA v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND THR PR. SECRETARY, DEPT. OF HIGHER, TECHNICAL EDUCATION, GOVT. OF JHARKHAND
WPC/467/2025 · 2025-10-06
Sri Ananda Sen
Transfer Petitionbody2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 34819 (JHR) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 34819 (JHR) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
2025:JHHC:30726 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W.P.(S) No. 467 of 2025
----- Rajiv Asthana, S/o Late H.K. Asthana, R/o Flat No.301, 404 Midland (West) Apartment, Anantpur, Near Overbridge, P.O. Hinoo, P.S. Chutia, District- Ranchi
------ Petitioner(s)
Versus 1.The State of Jharkhand through Principal Secretary, Department of Higher, Technical Education, Government of Jharkhand
2. The Director, Department of Higher, Technical Education, Government of Jharkhand 3.The Registrar, Ranchi University, Shahid Chowk, P.O.- G.P.O, P.S. Kotwali, Dist- Ranchi
------ Respondent(s)
……
CORAM :
SRI ANANDA SEN, J.
------ For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Nikhil Ranjan, Advocate For the State
: Mr. Sanjay Kumar Tiwari, S.C.-I For the Resp-RU : Mr. Anoop Kumar Mehta, Advocate
Mr. Atul Rai, Advocate
…...... 05 / 06.10.2025: Heard, learned counsel for the parties. 2. By filing this writ petition, petitioner has prayed for release of the pension, Gratuity and Leave Encashment along with interest @ 12% per annum as he has superannuated on 31.08.2024, but none of the aforesaid benefits are extended to him. 3. The petitioner was appointed as a Lecturer of Physics in Gossner College, Ranchi. The service of the petitioner was confirmed by the Bihar College Service Commission in the year, 1988 and ultimately serving the college for a long tenure, he superannuated on 31.08.2024. During this period of service his pay was also fixed by the Government and he was being paid salary and other benefits. 4. After his superannuation when he claimed his retiral benefits the same was refused by the respondents on the ground that the post against which the petitioner was working was “non-financed post” i.e. a post which does not carry any financial liability from the Government. 5. During course of argument, it has been accepted by the learned
counsel for the State and also learned counsel for the University that his salary and pay was fixed by the State Government and in entire tenure of service, the same was being paid by the State Government. 6. Annexure-A has been brought to the notice of this Court, which is an order by which the pay fixation of the petitioner was cancelled. The said document is dated 04.11.2024 wherein it has been mentioned that since, the petitioner was working against the post which is non- financed, pay fixation has been cancelled. 7.
On query, it has also been brought to the notice of this Court that before passing the order dated 04.11.2024 neither the petitioner was heard nor any notice was given to the petitioner. 8. From the aforesaid facts, it is clear that the petitioner worked in the Department for 41 years and he superannuated in August, 2024. Admittedly, his pay was fixed by the State Government and he got all the benefits. The salary of the petitioner was being paid by the State. Only after his superannuation, on 04.11.2024, the State Government has canceled the order of pay fixation, that too, without giving any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. Thus, a valuable right has been curtailed by the State without giving an opportunity of being heard. On this score alone the impugned order of cancellation of pay fixation dated 04.11.2024 (Annexure-A) is liable to be set aside and hence is quashed. 9. So far as the retiral benefits of the petitioner is concerned, once the State has paid his salary during entire service period, they cannot backtrack and refuse to pay the retiral benefits. 10. Further, in W.P.(S) No.450 of 2025 (Prof. Dr. Jitendra Prasad Sinha vs. State of Jharkhand and Others) and W.P.(S) No.560 of 2025 (Prof. Dr. Langeshwar Nath Choubey vs. The State of Jharkhand & Others), this Court has quashed the same impugned order which is the same at Annexure-11 in W.P.(S) No.450 of 2025 and at Annexure-7 in W.P.(S) No.560 of 2025 and relate to the petitioners in the aforesaid
writ. There cannot be a different treatment in the same issue to the petitioner. Thus, Annexure-A dated 04.11.2024, so far as this petitioner is concerned, is quashed and State is directed to release his entire retiral benefits including Provident Fund, Gratuity and Pension within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 11. Accordingly, the instant writ petition stands allowed. 12. Pending I.A., if any, stands disposed of. (ANANDA SEN, J.) R.S.