Back
2024 Supreme(Jhk) 986
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
SANJAY PRASAD, J.
Umeshwar Sharma - Appellant
Versus
The State of Jharkhand - Respondent
W.P. (S) No. 606 of 2019
Decided On : 02-09-2024
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Krishna Shankar
For the Respondent: Manish Kumar
The denial of Non-Practicing Allowance to doctors containing similar claims violates the principle of equitable relief, mandating adherence to prior court rulings.
Headnote:(A) Non-Practicing Allowance - Orders dated 28.07.2016 and 27.12.2018 quashed - Direction for payment from 26.05.1998 to 31.05.2000 - Earlier directions by Jharkhand High Court in W.P. (S) No. 2894/2001 and W.P. (S) No. 2822/2004 not followed. (Paras 1, 3, 16)
(B) Equitable relief - Principle of parity in treatment - Relief granted if similarly situated persons received benefits - Applicability of Bihar notification to Jharkhand doctors incorrectly applied by State. (Paras 15, 16)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner sought the payment of Non-Practicing Allowance for the period from 26.05.1998 to March 2000, which was denied despite previous orders by the Jharkhand High Court supporting such claims.
Findings of Court:
The orders rejecting the allowance claims were quashed, directing immediate payment based on prior judgments.
Issues: The central issues included the legality of the rejection of NPA claims and the applicability of state orders regarding allowances.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized adherence to prior rulings which mandated the payment of Non-Practicing Allowance to eligible doctors in Jharkhand, recognizing that similar claims have been upheld previously.
Result: Writ petition allowed, with directions for payment of Non-Practicing Allowance.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. writ petition seeks npa payment relief. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. petitioner's claim for npa based on notifications. (Para 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 3. court's prior rulings on npa payment referenced. (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 4. application of npa to ayurvedic doctors affirmed. (Para 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 5. legal precedent on equal treatment for similar cases. (Para 15) |
| 6. court's directive to pay npa issued. (Para 16 , 17 , 18) |
ORDER :
1. This writ petition has been filed on behalf of the petitioner for grant of following reliefs:
(i) Quashing of the Memo No. 234(20) dated 28.07.2016 [Annexure-8/1] and subsequently Memo No. 481(20) dated 27.12.2018 [Annexure-11] passed by Department of Health, Medical Education and Family Welfare, Govt. of Jharkhand whereby the Department has rejected the claim of the petitioner for payment of Non-Practicing Allowance [hereinafter called the NPA] to petitioner from 26.05.1998 to March, 2000 without considering the facts that the Hon’ble Jharkhand High Court in W.P.(S) No. 2822/2004 and W.P.(S) No. 2894/2001 has directed the respondents to pay the NPA in accordance with notification issued by the State of Bihar vide notification No. 189(1) dated 26.05.1998.
(ii) For direction upon the respondents after quashing the Memo No. 234 dated 28.07.2016 and subsequently Memo No. 481(20) dated 27.12.2018 to pay the NPA from 26.05.1998 to March, 2000 to petitioner as per the direction of the Hon’ble Jharkhand High Court in W.P. (S) No. 2894/2001 [Dr. Bijay Narayan & Ors. Vs. State of Jharkhand] and W.P. (S) No. 2822/2004 [Dr. Jagannath Tripathi & Ors. Vs. State of Jharkhand] and as per the Memo No. 10(vidhi) dated 24.12.2003 issued by the Secretary, Department of Health, Medical Education and Family Welfare, Govt. of Jharkhand.
2. Heard Mr. Krishna Shankar and Mr. Manish Kumar, learned Sr. S.C.II on behalf of the State.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the order dated 28.7.2016 (i.e. Annexure-8/1) and Order dated 27.12.2018, as contained in Annexure-11, are illegal, arbitrary and not sustainable in the eye of law. It is submitted that a Bench of this Court, Hon’ble Mr. Justice Vikramaditya Prasad (As His Lordship then was), vide order dated 10th February, 2003 (i.e. Annexure-3), passed in W.P. (S) No. 2894 of 2001 had directed for payment of non- practicing allowance (in short N.P.A.) to the Doctors, who had stopped practicing in the light of Notification dated 26.05.1998, issued by the State of Bihar (Jharkhand) (Health, Medical Education and Family Welfare) Department. It is submitted that even the State Government, vide Order dated 24.12.2003, had passed Order for implementing said Order dated 10.02.2003 passed in W.P.(S) No. 2894 of 2001 by the High Court of Jharkhand. It is further submitted that another Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide Order dated 03.08.2006, passed in W.P. (S) No. 2822 of 2004 (i.e. Annexure-5) had directed the Respondents to pay the non- practicing allowance to the said petitioners in accordance with the notifications issued by the State of Bihar, which is applicable in the State of Jharkhand, however, the Respondent concerned had rejected the claim of the petitioner vide Order dated 28.07.2016 (i.e. Annexure-8/1) and subsequently on 27.12.2018 (i.e. Annexure-11) and hence, the writ petition may be allowed.
4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer and has supported the impugned order dated 28.07.2016 (i.e. Annexure- 8/1) passed by Respondent No. 3 and also supported the order dated 27.12.2018 (i.e. Annexure-11) communicated by the Joint Secretary to the Government, Health, Medical Education and Family Welfare Department, Government of Jharkhand. It is submitted that the Respondents have filed counter affidavit and have taken the stand in support of the order dated 28.07.2016 and 27.12.2018 respectively.
5. Having heard learned counsel for both the sides and going through the records, this Court finds that earlier vide notification dated 26.05
