Manoj Kumar vs The State Of Bihar & Ors.

Heard Mr. Rishi Raj, learned Advocate for the petitioner and Mr. Rajesh Kumar, learned Advocate for the State.

The petitioner has invoked the prerogative writ jurisdiction of this Court seeking a direction upon the concerned respondent to make payment of incentive amount to the petitioner in lieu of the duty discharged by him during the pandemic period of Covid-19 in the financial year 2020-21 and 2021-22 equivalent to one month salary for each financial year with interest pursuant to the decision taken by the Health Department for extending grant of incentive to the doctors as well as employees/officers of the Health Department.

It is submitted that the Government of Bihar in the Department of Finance issued direction to all the Treasury Officers to ensure payment of incentives vide file no. 4503 dated 03.09.2020. In the light of the aforesaid direction, the Health Department Government of Bihar vide different Memos bearing no. 854 (5) dated 13.09.2021 and Memo no. 211(5) dated 15.02.2022 directed for payment of the incentive amount to the employee/officers working under the Health Depart during pandemic Covid-19. Despite the aforesaid direction and the amount having been allocated by the Health Department, the petitioner has been deprived from such incentives and surprisingly, the pick and choose method has been adopted and some of the employees of Health Department have been extended such benefit but till date the claim of the petitioner has not been resolved.

Apart from the aforesaid grievance, the petitioner has raised one another claim with respect to non-inclusion/credit of amount deducted from the monthly salary of the petitioner in the financial year 2019-20 in the Provident Fund Account of the petitioner bearing Provident Fund Account no. JHK/JHS/44 and to up to date Provident Fund account of the petitioner.

Learned Advocate for the State submitted that the petitioner has claimed two different grievances in one petition, though he ought to file two writ petitions for two separate claims. He further prays for a short adjournment to file a response with regard to the present position and status of the claim of the petitioner.

Having considered the nature of the grievance of the petitioner, though the stand of the State appears to he justified for the present. However, this Court instead of keeping the matter pending awaiting response of the State, deems it fit and proper to direct the respondent no. 8 to consider the claim of the petitioner with regard to incentives in lieu of the duty discharged by the petitioner during the period of Covid-19 pandemic and ensure payment of the same, preferably within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order, if there is no legal or administrative impediment otherwise.

Considering the second grievance of the petitioner, this Court further directs the petitioner to file a separate representation before the Director, Provident Fund Directorate (Finance Department) with a clear averment and the documents disclosing the contribution deducted from the petitioner’s salary, preferably within a period of three weeks from today. In case such an application is filed, the Director, Provident Fund Directorate shall do the needful and credit the amount in the Provident Fund Account as referred herein above, within a further period of four weeks. In case the claim of the petitioner does not find merit consideration, he would be obliged to pass a reasoned order disclosing the reason for non-inclusion/credit of the aforesaid amount.

With the aforesaid direction, the writ petition stands disposed off.