Advocates:
['NAGMANI TIWARI', '', 'AMIT KR VERMA', 'KAUSTAV PANDA', 'SUDARSHAN SHRIVASTAVA']

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

WP(S) No. 5250 of 2013

----

Mohammed Yunus

...

…

Petitioner

-Versus-

1. The State of Jharkhand

2. Secretary, Health Department, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi

3. Director in Chief, Health Services, Govt. of Jharkhand, Ranchi

4. Deputy Commissioner, Chaibasa

5. Civil Surgeon, Chaibasa

6. District Leprosy Officer, Chaibasa

7. The Accountant General, Jharkhand, Ranchi...

Respondents

----

CORAM :HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE APARESH KUMAR SINGH

----

For the Petitioner

:Mr. Kaustav Panda

For the Respondents

:M/s Prem Pujari Roy, JC to GA &

R.Srivastava

----

06- 06.04.2015

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

The petitioner subsisting grievance is in relation to grant of benefit

of ACP and fixation of pension thereupon as he has retired on 30th

June,2010 from the post of non-medical Assistant, District Leprosy Officer,

Chaibasa under the Health Department, Government of Jharkhand.

Counsel, for the petitioner submits that in the counter affidavit filed

on behalf of the Medical Officer, District Leprosy Office, Chaibasa on

20.1.2014 in para 13 and 14 statements have been made that the process

of confirmation of ACP/MACP to the petitioner is under active

consideration before the respondents and a decision would be taken

within two months. However, till date the grievance of the petitioner has

remained unredressed.

Counsel for the respondent-State submits that the needful would be

done by the competent authority and a direction may be issued to that

effect.

Having regard to the aforesaid facts and the statements made, for

the subsisting grievance as aforesaid, which appears to be also under

consideration since long, in stead of keeping the writ petition pending, the

same is being disposed of by directing the competent authority to take a

2.

decision in respect of grant of ACP to the petitioner and for fixation of his

pension in accordance with law within a period of 12 weeks from the date

of receipt of a copy of this order. The petitioner shall represent before the

respondent no.5, Civil Surgeon, Chaibasa, who, if he is competent to take

such a decision, shall do of his own or otherwise place the matter before

the competent authority for the needful within the same time. Needless to

say that dependent upon such decision, the monetary benefit arising out

of grant of ACP shall be released in favour of the petitioner without

unreasonable delay.

This writ petition stands disposed of.

(Aparesh Kumar Singh, J. )

Pandey