2025:JHHC:18943 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P. (S) No. 2531 of 2025 --------- Manmohan Prasad Sah aged about 66 years son of Tarni Prasad Sah, resident of village-Sondiha, P.O. Baksara, P.S. Godda (M), District-Godda (Jharkhand) ....Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. The Principal Secretary, Department of School Education & Literacy, Project Building, P.O. & P.S. Dhurwa, District-Ranchi (Jharkhand) 3. The Director, Primary Education, Department of School Education & Literacy, Project Building, P.O. & P.S. Dhurwa, District-Ranchi (Jharkhand) 4. The Deputy Commissioner, Sahebganj, P.O. & P.S. Sahebganj, District-Sahebganj (Jharkhand) 5. The District Superintendent of Education, Sahebganj, P.O. & P.S. Sahebganj, District- Sahebganj (Jharkhand) 6. The Treasury Officer, Sahebganj, P.O. & P.S. Sahebganj, District-Sahebganj (Jharkhand) 7. The Accountant General, Jharkhand, P.O. & P.S. Doranda, District-Ranchi (Jharkhand) ....Respondents --------- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN --------- For the Petitioner : Md. Jalisur Rahman, Advocate For the Resp.-State : Mr. Manish Mishra, G.P.-V --------- 03/Dated:-09.07.2025 1. Heard learned counsels of the parties. 2. The instant writ application has been preferred by the petitioner praying therein for the following relief: (i) For a direction to the respondents concerned to pay the B.Sc. Untrained pay Scale of Rs. 680-965/- from the date of his initial appointment and also, the B.Sc. Trained pay scale i.e. Rs. 850-1360/- from the date he became trained in the year 2002, which has not been given to the petitioner till date, even after training, in view of the judgment of this Hon’ble Court dated 15.06.2017 (Annexure-3) passed in (Sanjay Kumar Jha and other Versus The State of Jharkhand and others) and also, the judgment dated 01.08.2023 (Annexure-6) passed in W.P.(S) No. 2308 of 2020 (Sanjay Kumar Jha and other Versus The State of Jharkhand and others) with its consequential benefits in promotion, pension, gratuity, earned leave, etc. to the present petitioner, as the present petitioner has already been superannuated on 28.02.2019 in Matric Untrained Scale i.e. Rs. 535-765/-and the recovery has been made to the tune of Rs. 5,19,828/- without any show cause or without initiating any proceeding, which cannot be done in the light of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of “State of Punjab & Others Versus Rafiq Masih (Whitewasher) & Others” reported in (2015) 4 SCC 334. 2025:JHHC:18943 2 3. At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the issue involved in this writ application has been squarely covered by the order passed by the coordinate Bench of this Court in W.P. (S) No. 3286 of 2016 and W.P. (S) No. 2308 of 2020 and also the appellate order passed by the Division Bench in L.P.A. No. 567 of 2018. 4. Relying upon the aforesaid judgments, learned counsel for the petitioner prays that since the issues are same and similar; as such, similar benefit may be extended to this petitioner what has been extended to the petitioners of the above referred case. 5. Learned counsel for the respondents could not dispute the fact that the issue involved in this writ application is squarely covered by the referred judgment. 6. Having regard to the fair submissions of the learned counsels for the parties, the instant writ application is hereby disposed of by directing the respondent No.3 to treat this writ application as representation and pass an order with regard to the claim made in this writ application in the light of orders referred to hereinabove and pay the same and similar benefit, what has been paid to the similarly situated employees in accordance with law and applicable rules and regulations within a period of 16 weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. The petitioner is directed to serve the copy of this writ application along with its order to the 3rd respondent. It goes without saying that the amount which was recovered by the respondents illegally, shall be refunded to this 2025:JHHC:18943 3 petitioner along with prevailing bank rate of interest within aforesaid stipulated period. 7. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the instant writ application stands disposed of. Pending I.A., if any, also stands closed. (Deepak Roshan, J.) vikas/-