High CourtsSingle Bench

Surendra Prasad vs State of Bihar (now Jharkhand) and Others

Jharkhand High Court · Decided on 24 July 2006 · Citation: (2007) 1 BLJR 173 : (2006) 4 JCR 268

HON’BLE JUDGES
Amareshswar Sahay, J
CASE NUMBER
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 2957 of 1999 (R)
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

5 paragraphs · 274 words

Amareshwar Sahay, J.—The prayer of the petitioner in this writ application is for direction to the Respondents to provide new pay scale with effect from 01/01/1996 in terms of the recommendation of the 5th Pay Revision Committee Report and to refix his retiral benefits in terms of the salary which the petitioner would get on account of the implementation of the new pay scale and also to regularize the services of the petitioner for the period from 05/10/1996 to 10/04/1997.

2.

As it appears that with regard to all the aforesaid claims, the petitioner had already submitted his representation before the Commissioner-cum-Secretary, Land Reforms Department, Government of Bihar, Patna but no order on his representation was passed either rejecting or accepting the claim of the petitioner.

3.

In this view of the matter, this application is being disposed of by directing the petitioner to file a fresh representation before the Commissioner-cum-Secretary, Land Reforms Department, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi within a period of four weeks from today stating in detail about all his claims and, if, such a representation is filed by the petitioner within the specified period, the concerned Commissioner-cum-Secretary shall consider the claims of the petitioner on its right perspective, decide the claims either this way or that way and pass an appropriate reasoned order in accordance with law within a period of eight weeks from the date of filing of such representation by the petitioner,

4.

It is made clear that I have not gone into the merit of the claims of the petitioner either this way or that way.

5.

With this observations and directions, this writ application is disposed of.