IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
ANANDA SEN, J.
Akshaibat Prasad, son of late Shiv Charan Mahato – Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand, through the Secretary, Commercial Taxes, Government of Jharkhand and Ors. – Respondents
W.P.(S) No. 1016 of 2025
Decided On : 27-02-2025
(A) Service Law - Mandamus - The petitioner sought confirmation of service and benefits of ACP/MACP after 34 years of continuous service without promotion - The State's refusal to confirm service based on lack of sanctioned post was deemed exploitative and unacceptable. (Paras 2-6)
(B) Employment Rights - The court emphasized that an employee who has rendered long service should not be deprived of benefits due to administrative lapses. (Paras 5-6)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner served as a Peon and subsequently as LDC in the Commercial Tax Department for over 34 years, superannuating without promotion or ACP/MACP benefits.
Findings of Court:
The court found the State's refusal to confirm the petitioner's service and grant benefits as unjust and issued a mandamus for confirmation and benefits to be granted within eight weeks.
Issues: The main issue was whether the petitioner was entitled to ACP/MACP benefits despite the State's claim of unconfirmed service.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the prolonged service of the petitioner necessitated confirmation and benefits, condemning the State's inaction as exploitative.
Result: Writ petition allowed.
JUDGMENT :
ANANDA SEN, J.
In this writ petition, petitioner has prayed for mandamus upon the respondent-State to immediately confirm the service of the petitioner and consequently to make payment of 1st, 2nd and 3rd ACP/ MACP benefits especially taking into consideration that the petitioner has continuously served for more than 34 years without being granted single promotion.
2. The admitted fact of this case is that the petitioner was appointed as a Peon in the office of the Joint Commissioner, Commercial Tax Department, Ranchi and was posted in the Hazaribagh Circle, Hazaribagh under the then State of Bihar. After bifurcation of the State of Bihar, the service of the petitioner was taken over by the State of Jharkhand. The petitioner has worked as a LDC and superannuated on 31.07.2014. It is also an admitted fact that he is getting his pensionary benefit, but neither any promotion was given to the petitioner during his entire tenure of service nor he was granted the benefit of ACP/MACP. Claiming the said benefits, he had approach this Court.
3. It is the case of the petitioner that as his service was not confirmed by the Department, he has not been granted the benefit of ACP/MACP though, he has rendered continuous service for 34 years in the Department before his superannuation.
4. The counter affidavit has been filed by the State and the defence has been taken by the respondents that the service of the petitioner has not yet been confirmed and without confirmation of service, the petitioner is not entitled for ACP/MACP benefit. It has been submitted that there was no sanctioned post, when petitioner was appointed. The fact that the petitioner had worked of 34 years and superannuated from the department and that he is receiving the pensionary benefits, has not been denied by the State. His appointment is also not denied.
5. The aforesaid admitted facts of the case reflects the highest degree of exploitation by the State. After taking service from a LDC for 34 years and after his superannuation, the State’s plea that the service of this petitioner cannot be confirmed, is atrocious. This attitude is unbecoming of a model employer, which is unexpected from the State. Once when the employee has worked for 34 years, has superannuated and is receiving pension the respondents cannot take a plea that his service cannot be confirmed, to deprive him of the benefits of ACP/MACP. The stand taken by the State Officials is deprecated.
6. Thus, a mandamus is issued upon the State of Jharkhand and the Chief Secretary, Government of Jharkhand is directed to take appropriate step to immediately confirm the service of the petitioner and grant him the benefit of ACP/MACP and revise the pension accordingly. The entire process should be completed within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt a copy of this order.
7. Accordingly, the writ petition stands allowed.
Long-term service entitles an employee to confirmation and benefits, regardless of administrative hurdles.
The court held that long-serving employees are entitled to confirmation of service and benefits, rejecting the State's refusal as exploitative.
Rejection of ACP/MACP benefits invalid if based on missing employer-maintained records like service book, ACR, or unverified service periods not attributable to employee; employer must regularize ser....
The court ruled that entitlements must be based on the original appointment date, not a subsequent reappointment, reinforcing court orders for reinstatement.
An employee's entitlement to ACP cannot be negated by a subsequent integrity report; assessments must consider records up to the completion of the stipulated service duration.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the regular service for the purpose of ACP benefits should commence from the date of absorption, as per the MACP Scheme.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.