2025:JHHC:26245 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI WP(S) No.450 of 2025 ----- Prof. Dr. Jitendra Prasad Sinha, son of late Bhola Prasad Sinha, retired Reader, Department of Botany, Gossner College, Ranchi, resident of House No. 29, Budh Vihar, opposite Ashok Nagar, Road No. 4, PO Ashok Nagar, PS Argora, District Ranchi … Petitioner(s). Versus 1.The State of Jharkhand 2.Higher & Technical Education Department, Govt. of Jharkhand, through its Principal Secretary/Secretary, office at Yojna Bhawan, Nepal House Campus, PO and PS Doranda, District Ranchi 3.Director, Higher Education, Govt. of Jharkhand, Project Building, PO and PS Dhurwa, District Ranchi 4.Ranchi University, Ranchi, through its Registrar, office at Shahid Chowk, PO and PS Dhurwa, District Ranchi 5.Vice Chancellor, Ranchi University, Ranchi, office at Shahid Chowk, PO and PS Dhurwa, District Ranchi 6.Registrar, Ranchi University, Ranchi, office at Shahid Chowk, PO and PS Dhurwa, District Ranchi 7.Gossner College, Ranchi, through its Professor In- charge/Principal, office at Gel Church Complex, Gungutoli Lane, PO and PS Hindpiri, District Ranchi … Respondent(s). CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J. ------ For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Atanu Banerjee, Advocate Mr. Suman Kr. Ghosh, Advocate Mr. Aditya Banerjee, Advocate For the State : Ms. Amrita Banerjee, AC to GP-I For Ranchi University : Mr. Anoop Kr. Mehta, Advocate …...... 06 /29.08.2025: Heard the parties. 2. The petitioner by filing this writ petition has challenged part of the order dated 04.11.2024 as contained in Annexure-11 whereby the fixation of pay of the petitioner has been cancelled. Further, consequential effect of the said order, that is the stoppage of pension is also under challenge. 3. The petitioner further prays to direct the respondents to pay his regular pension and the arrears from the date of the impugned order. 4. The petitioner was appointed as a Lecturer of Botany in 2025:JHHC:26245 2 Gossner College (Aided Minority College). He was appointed in the second post. The first post in the subject Botany was with “financial aid” and the second post was without any aid. Financial aid connotes the financial assistance given by the State. 5. The petitioner filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, numbered as Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 3495 of 1992(R) before the Ranchi Bench of Patna High Court, praying for a direction upon the respondent-State to provide grant of finance for the second sanctioned post of Botany, in the said college. Along with the petitioner another Professor in Zoology also prayed for the same relief, for his subject. 6. The said writ petition was allowed on 20.08.1999. In paragraph no. 9 of the aforesaid orders, the Court held that the authority i.e. the State is bound to sanction grant in aid in respect of the post in question subject to such regulation as may be available under the law for use of grant. Further, in paragraph no. 10 it has been held that the petitioners are entitled for salary out of such grant in aid. The order passed in the writ application attained finality. By virtue of the aforesaid order second post of Botany, in which the petitioner was working, became a post with grant in aid. Ultimately on attaining the age of superannuation, duly got superannuated. Be it noted that the petitioner was paid salary in the scale and also got the retiral and pensionary benefits. 7. Pension was paid to the petitioner but by virtue of the impugned order which was issued on 04.11.2024 the respondents declared that the post in which the petitioner was working i.e. second post in Botany is a post without aid. Thus, fixation of pay of the petitioner was bad and the same could not have been fixed. His pay fixation was cancelled/recalled. Consequently, the petitioner’s pension was also stopped. 8. The impugned order was passed pursuant to a LPA No. 115 of 2023 arising out of WP(S) No. 3302 of 2014. The writ petition was filed for fixation of pay in the scale of the Reader/Associate Professor. In the said writ petition the Writ Court 2025:JHHC:26245 3 directed to revise the pay-scale of the petitioner for the post of Reader w.e.f. 23.03.1989 i.e. the day the petitioner was promoted to the post of Reader by the competent authority. Further all consequential benefits were directed to be paid. The said order was challenged by the State of Jharkhand in LPA No. 115 of 2023. The Letters Patent Court dismissed the said LPA on the ground of limitation. Now ultimately the order of Letters Patent Appeal Court has been set aside by the Hon’ble Supreme Court and the Letters Patent stood revived. 9. After going through the order passed in the said writ petition being WP(S) No. 3302 of 2014, I find that the writ petition was filed by the petitioner praying for a particular scale. The issue whether the post is “with finance” or “without finance” was not the issue before the writ Court, rather the same could not have been, as the issue was already set at rest way-back on 20.08.1999 in Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 3495 of 1992(R). At this point it has been brought to the notice of the Court by the learned counsel for the respondents that LPA arising of the said writ petition was also dismissed. Thus, the issue whether the post is with finance or without finance has been set at rest and has attained finality. Now by virtue of aforesaid order in CWJC No. 3495 of 1992(R) direction has been given to the competent authority to sanction/give grant in aid in respect of the post in which the petitioner was working i.e. the second post of Botany. Similarly salary was directed to be paid out of such grant in aid. Once the salary has been directed to be paid out of grant in aid then all the monetary benefits arising out of the said post including pension and gratuity must be paid by the State as the post has been treated as the post with finance. Further, it is pertinent to mention that after the order was passed in CWJC No. 3495 of 1992(R) the scale of the petitioner was fixed and salary was paid by the State. In view of the order dated 20.08.1999 in CWJC No. 3495 of 1992(R) and consequential payment of salary and pension, in my view the respondents exceeded their jurisdiction in passing the impugned order dated 04.11.2024 holding that the 2025:JHHC:26245 4 post is an unfinanced post. Thus, the impugned order dated 04.11.2024 so far this petitioner is concerned, is bad and is in excess of jurisdiction and is accordingly set aside. 10. The petitioner is entitled for pension which was being paid to the petitioner. The respondents are directed to pay to the petitioner the current pension and also the arrears of pension which was stopped pursuant to the order dated 04.11.2024 passed by the respondents. 11. This writ petition stands allowed. 12. The entire payment should be made within six weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this order. (ANANDA SEN, J.) Tanuj/