Ashok Kumar & Ors. v. The State of Jharkhand & Ors.
Case Details & Bench
- Court
- High Court
- Hon'ble Judges
- J. Chelameswar
- J. Sanjay Kishan Kaul
- Judgment Date
- 2018-05-14
- Court Decision / Holding
- Paragraphs 25 and 26 of the earlier order stand deleted; Paragraph 27 is to be read as: the respondent will ensure that the differential mandatory benefits including increments are remitted to the appellants within a period of three months from the date of the order. Ordered accordingly.
- Final Disposition
- Modification in earlier order.
Parties to the Case
Appellants / Petitioners
- Ashok Kumar & Ors.
Respondents
- The State of Jharkhand & Ors.
Legal Representation & Advocates
Counsels for Petitioners
- • Amit Gupta
- • Ms. Mansi Kukreja (For M/s. Mitter & Mitter Co.)
Counsels for Respondents
- • Tapesh Kumar Singh
- • Mohd. Waquas
- • Aditya Pratap Singh
- • Chandra Bhushan Prasad
Case Synopsis & Summary
Supreme Court modifies its earlier order in Ashok Kumar & Ors. v. State of Jharkhand & Ors. (Civil Appeal No. 877 of 2018). The matter, arising out of the Jharkhand Judicial Service (Recruitment) Rules, 2004 (rr. 21, 22 and 27), refers to a judgment dated 11 May 2018 reported at [2017] 7 SCR 755. On a mention, the Court notes that paragraphs 25 and 26 of the 11 May 2018 judgment may not be necessary and should stand deleted. The counsel for both sides agree, and the Court directs that paragraph 27 be read as: “the respondent will ensure that the differential mandatory benefits including increments are remitted to the appellants within a period of three months from the date of the order.” The order is annotated as “Modification in earlier order” and declares that the earlier directions in paras 25-26 are effaced. The bench comprises Justices Chelameswar and Kaul. The modification is intended to clarify the remedy without re-adjudicating merits, converting the previous directives into a concrete time-bound obligation for remittance of benefits. The civil appeal traces to the High Court of Jharkhand’s order in W.P. (S) No. 5186 of 2014, and the document serves to enforce prompt payment of differential benefits to the appellants.
Provisions of Law Cited
Submissions & Arguments
Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners
On the matter being mentioned, the learned counsel for the parties stated that there may not be necessity of a direction as contained in paragraphs 25 and 26 of the judgment passed by this Court on 11.5.2018. They further plead that paragraph 27 of the said judgment may be read as under: “the respondent will ensure that the differential mandatory benefits including increments are remitted to the appellants within a period of three months from the date of the order.”
Contentions of Respondents
The respondents’ counsel joined in the request to delete paragraphs 25 and 26 and supported reading paragraph 27 as described, seeking a clear, time-bound remedy rather than broader, indefinite relief.
Cited Precedents (1)
| Case Name | Citation | Treatment | Explanation |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ashok Kumar & Ors. v. State of Jharkhand | [2017] 7 SCR 755 | Partly Overruled / Limited | The 2018 order deletes paragraphs 25-26 of the cited judgment and reads paragraph 27 to impose a time-bound remittance of differential benefits, thereby partially modifying the earlier decision. |
Diagnostic Tool
Does this judgment govern your specific facts?
Don't risk relying on a distinguishable precedent. Enter your facts or proposition below. We will test it against Ashok Kumar & Ors. v. The State of Jharkhand & Ors. and instantly map out authorities that support, challenge, or govern your position.
Extracted Judgment Text
Exact text extracted from official judgment records.