Research › Search › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

2000 DIGILAW 336 (PAT)

Kameshwar Mishra v. State Of Bihar

2000-03-01

RADHA MOHAN PRASAD

body2000
Judgment Radha Mohan Prasad, J. 1. In this writ petition, petitioner has claimed for grant of full pension treating him in continuous service since his initial appointment on 9.4.1955 in Gandhi High School Rajpur in the district of Supaul as Assistant teacher. 2. In short, the relevant facts as claimed by the petitioner are that he was appointed on 9.4.1955 in Gandhi High School, Rajpur in the district of Supaul as an Assistant teacher and worked in the said School till 6.9.1979. Thereafter from 7.9.1979 to 30th June, 1996 he worked in Lalit Girls Vidyapith, Ganpatganj, Supaul as Assistant teacher, and retired from the said School. The said School got permanent affiliation since 13.12.1979 and was finally taken over by the Government with effect from 4.4.1981. On his retirement he was given compassionate pension for two years and thereafter it was fixed on the basis of services rendered by him from 4.4.1981 to 30.6.96 and not from the date of his initial appointment on 9.4.1955. Thus, his grievance is against the fixation of his pension on the basis of services rendered by him from 4.4.1981 to 30.6.1996 only and not from 9.4.1955 while he worked in Gandhi High School, Rajpur. It is admitted case of the petitioner that he resigned from Gandhi High School, Rajpur and joined at Lalit Girls Vidyapith, Ganpatganj, Supaul. 3. In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the District Education Officer, Saharsa (Respondent no. 5) the claim of the petitioner that he worked in Gandhi High School, Rajpur from 9.6.1955 has been denied. According to the said Respondent, from the attendance register and from the acquittance roll, it transpired that the petitioner had worked there only for a very short period with effect from 13.4.1963 to 25.6.1964. It is contended that the service of the petitioner for the purpose of pension can only be reckoned from the date the management and control of the School was taken over under the Act. The period of service which he had put in prior to 4.4.81 cannot be counted for the purpose of pension and gratuity. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in view of the Finance Department resolution no. 581 dated 15.1.1982 where a teacher has resigned and joined other similar School the period shall not be treated as break in service. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in view of the Finance Department resolution no. 581 dated 15.1.1982 where a teacher has resigned and joined other similar School the period shall not be treated as break in service. In support of the case of the petitioner that he joined Gandhi High School, Rajpur on 9.4.1955 and that on tendering resignation he joined Lalit Girls Vidyapith on 7.9.1979, learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on photo copy of the service book which has been annexed as Annexure-4 series. Thus, according to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the change in School cannot be treated as break in service and the petitioner cannot be denied of the benefit of the services rendered by him at Gandhi High School, Rajpur. 5. Learned counsel for the State on the other hand submitted that photo copy of the so called service book of Gandhi High School, Rajpur is not sufficient to substantiate the claim of the petitioner that he joined the said School on 9.4.1955 and worked there till 6.9.1979. A perusal of the said service book (Annexure-4) shows that it is not the original service book and the same has been certified by the District Education Officer, Saharsa only on 18.10.1994, though the petitioner in his affidavit has claimed it to be the photo copy of part pages of service book. It has further been submitted that in any view of the matter the petitioner cannot get advantage of his past service at Gandhi High School as it is not claimed that at the time of his joining at Lalit Girls Vidyapith had permanent recognition which would have made him entitled to claim the past services rendered by him at Gandhi High School, Rajpur for the purpose of computation of pension. 6. The Court finds substance in the submission of the learned counsel for the State. Petitioner has not produced any other evidence to substantiate his claim that he has worked at Gandhi High Schooi from 9.4.1955 to 6.9.1979. This Court finds it difficult to rely upon petitioners service book opened at Gandhi High School contained in Anneuxre-4. The said so called service book does not bear any detail nor it contains the signature of the concerned District Education Officer who is the custodian of service book. This Court finds it difficult to rely upon petitioners service book opened at Gandhi High School contained in Anneuxre-4. The said so called service book does not bear any detail nor it contains the signature of the concerned District Education Officer who is the custodian of service book. It only contains the attestation which is claimed to have been made by the District Education Officer, Saharsa only on 18.10.1994 i.e. long after the petitioner left Gandhi High School. Moreover, the petitioner himself admitted that Lalit Girls Vidyapith Ganpatganj, where he joined later was granted permanent affiliation/recognition since 13.12.1979 and was taken over on 4.4.1981. The Finance Departments circular no. 581 dated 15.1.1982 was later amended vide Government resolution contained in Human Resources Development Department Memo no. 636 dated 18th July, 1992, and according to the said resolution where teachers even working in a recognised secondary school during his service joins another non-recognised Government secondary school and the said School is given recognition after his joining then such break in service is not to be condoned and his past service is not to be counted for pension. It is not the claim of the petitioner that Gandhi High School from where he joined Lalit Girls Vidyapith was a recognised School. Thus, the petitioner cannot get the benefit even under the said amended Government resolution. 7. Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on the order dated 9.12.1998 passed in the case of Dhrub Roy V/s. State of Bihar & ors. (C.W.J.C. No. 9673 of 1997) (Annexure-5) in support of his contention that in view of the Government resolution dated 15.1.1982 the petitioner shall be entitled to the benefit of past service. This Court fails to appreciate as to how the said order is of any help to the petitioner. This Court by the said order simply disposed of the writ petition with a direction to the Accountant General to consider and issue authority slip in terms of the decision of the Finance Department without taking into consideration the later Government resolution dated 18th July, 1992. 8. This Court in the case of Ram Pravesh Singh V/s. State of Bihar & ors. (C.W.J.C. No. 10258/96) has elaborately considered the scope of the said two Government resolutions and held that the earlier Government resolution stood amended by the later one. 8. This Court in the case of Ram Pravesh Singh V/s. State of Bihar & ors. (C.W.J.C. No. 10258/96) has elaborately considered the scope of the said two Government resolutions and held that the earlier Government resolution stood amended by the later one. However, in any view of the matter, the petitioner cannot get the benefit under either of the said two Government resolutions as he has failed to substantiate that he worked in the said School till 6.9.1979 and that at the time he resigned the said School was recognised one. This Court finds sub-stance in the stand of the Respondents that the petitioner shall not be entitled to get the benefit of the services rendered by him before 4.4.1981 for computation of pension as the said School was taken over by the Government under the Act on 4.4.1981 and the petitioner became Government servant only with effect from the said date. 9. Thus, this Court does not find any merit in the writ application and the same is accordingly dismissed but without costs.