Judgment invalidating government policy shifting service benefits cut-off date revives original policy for all similarly situated employees, including non-litigants, as declaration is in rem and non-discrimination mandates uniform application.

JUDGMENT :

ANANDA SEN, J.

Heard learned counsel representing the petitioners and learned counsel representing the respondents.

2. The petitioners in this writ petition pray for a direction in a nature of Mandamus commanding upon the respondent authorities to revise and refix and grant the benefits of DACP to the petitioners along with consequential benefits from 05.04.2002 in light of the observations made in the judgment dated 02.08.2023 passed by the Division Bench of this Court in L.P.A. No.86 of 2018 (Dr. Shyam Sundar Singh & Ors. Vs. The State of Jharkhand & Ors.)

2.1. The petitioners further pray that a direction may be given to the respondent authorities to release the arrears and all consequential benefits after refixation of DACP benefits w.e.f., 05.04.2002.

3. The petitioners are the persons from Medical Cadre.

4. Admittedly, the DACP scheme was floated and the same has been extended to all the persons of Medical Cadre. The cut-off date was fixed by the Government.

4.1. Later on, it was modified to 01.09.2008, vide Resolution dated 11.09.2013.

4.2. Earlier the DACP Scheme was made effective from 05.04.2002 in light of 5^th Pay Revision and w.e.f. 29.10.2008 in the light of the 6^th Pay Revision. The benefits were granted w.e.f. 05.04.2002 and the actual benefit from 29.10.2008 and the financial benefit from 01.04.2009.

4.3. Pursuant to the order dated 11.09.2013, the Department of Health, Medical Education & Family Welfare, Government of Jharkhand, issued a Notification dated 15.01.2014, whereby benefits of DACP granted to all the eligible employees vide Notification dated 02.04.2013 were withdrawn.

4.4. Being aggrieved, some of the employees filed writ petitions being W.P.(S) No.1940 of 2014 (Dr. Shyam Sundar Singh & Ors. Vs. The State of Jharkhand & Ors.), which was dismissed vide order dated 18.12.2017.

4.5. Challenging the aforesaid order of the Writ Court, a Letters Patent Appeal being L.P.A. No.86 of 2018 was filed. The said Letters Patent Appeal was heard and stood allowed by the Division Bench vide judgment dated 02.08.2023, setting aside the judgment of the learned Single Judge. It was held that shifting of the date was not proper.

4.6. The aforesaid judgment passed in the Letters Patent Appeal was challenged before the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Special Leave Petition (Civil) Diary No.52346 of 2023 (The State of Jharkhand, through Secretary, Department of Finance & Ors. Vs. Shyam Sundar Singh & Ors.). The Hon’ble Supreme Court vide order dated 19.02.2024, dismissed the Special Leave Petition, keeping open the question of law.

5. Since the order has been passed by the Division Bench holding that the shifting of the date of DACP is not proper, these petitioners who were affected by shifting of such date has now approached this Court by this writ petition, claiming the same benefit which was granted to the litigations who had approached this Court by filing Letters Patent Appeal being L.P.A. No.86 of 2018.

6. It is the case of the petitioners that since similar benefit has been granted to similarly situated persons, the fact that the petitioners have not earlier approached the Court, cannot come in their way to get the same benefits. It is stated it has been decided in Letters Patent Appeal that the shifting of date is bad. Once it has been held that the shifting of the date is bad, consequential benefits should be granted not only to the appellants in Lett