Research › Search › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

2000 DIGILAW 1136 (PAT)

Shridhar Pandey v. State of Bihar

2000-09-19

S.K.KATRIAR

body2000
ORDER This Court is aghast at the malfunctioning and/or the non-functioning of the Government of Bihar. Case after case is coming before this Court where the employees have overstayed in service and continued to function even after reaching the age of superannuation. The State Government seems to be unmindful of the gravity of the situation. It has to ensure that no government servant functions at all after he reaches the age of superannuation. In the present case, the petitioner was functioning as a Chowkidar, and he completed his age of superannuation on 31.1.97. He continued to function thereafter till such time he received the letter bearing no. 735, dated 6.3.98 (Annexure 4), issued under the signature of the Executive Engineer, Department of Building Construction, Patna Division, Patna, that he has reached the age of superannuation on 31.1.97, and that he should submit his pension papers accordingly which was followed by the petitioner's reply (marked Annexure 5) to the letter, wherein the admits that he has been functioning after 31.1.97. This Court takes a very serious view of this matter. The signatory of the aforesaid letter dated 6.3.98 (Annexure 4), shall be personally present in Court on the next occasion. The Supreme Court in s judgment reported in 1997(2) PLJR 129 (Radha Kishan VS. Union of India) has observed that in such a situation the overdrawn salary should be recovered from the employee and appropriate disciplinary action should be taken against the persons responsible for continuance of the employee even after the age of superannuation. In that view of the matter, this Court hereby directs the Chief Secretary to submit an affidavit personally sworn by him after conducting an enquiry into the matter as to the apportionment of responsibility and the steps taken against the erring officials of the Bihar Government responsible for continuance of the petitioner in service after reaching the age of superannuation as well as against the petitioner. This Court should also be informed of the action taken against the petitioner. The Chief Secretary shall consider the possibility of taking action in criminal courts as well as under the Pension Rules. This is a very serious matter and this Court expects most stringent action against all erring persons in all such cases. 2. This Court should also be informed of the action taken against the petitioner. The Chief Secretary shall consider the possibility of taking action in criminal courts as well as under the Pension Rules. This is a very serious matter and this Court expects most stringent action against all erring persons in all such cases. 2. This Court is undoubtedly very sorry to note that these are essentially administrative functions and matters of routine administration which are being passed on to courts on account of mis-governance. 3. Put up on 27.11.2000 at the top of the list, on which date other matters of similar nature are coming up. Let a copy of this order be handed over to Mr. Ajay Bihari Sinha learned Govt. Counsel No. X.