Research › Search › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

2006 DIGILAW 1058 (PAT)

Shyam Kishore Singh v. State Of Bihar

2006-11-13

J.N.BHATT, S.K.SINHA

body2006
Judgment 1. Upon a joint request of learned counsels for the parties, this Letters Patent Appeal has been taken up for final hearing today. It is directed against the judgment of the learned Single Judge dated 3.4.2003 in C.W.J.C. No. 13885 of 2001 under clause 10 of the Letters Patent. 2. The present appellant is the original writ petitioner who was forced to initiate a legal battle by filing a writ petition under Article 26 of the Constitution of India on account of denial of counting of his service rendered before his joining or taking over of earlier school with effect from 29.2.1988. 3. The admitted facts may be highlighted at this juncture which are: (i) The petitioner joined recognised High School, Hasua in the District of Nawadah on 26.4.1966 and remained there till 30.11.1983. (ii) Later on he joined Brig Gopal Lai High School on 1.12.1983 and as the aforesaid school was taken over by the Government with effect from 29.2.1988 the original writ petitioner became a Government employee. (iii) The petitioner sought for voluntary retirement which was allowed with effect from 1st January, 2000 by the concerned authority. (iv) The Government passed a resolution dated 15.1.1982, wherein, it has been, specifically, mentioned that the erstwhile school employees, teaching and non-teaching, shall become employees of the Government. (v) Again, the same resolution was reiterated by resolution dated 21.12.1982, amply clarifying the earlier resolution that the employees of the erstwhile school before taking over will, also, be entitled to be considered for the purpose of benefit of seniority. (vi) A person who could be considered for the seniority, obviously, would be entitled to pensionary benefits. 4. It is the settled proposition of law that the pension is not a charity or a mercy of the Master. Pension is a right and it is crystalisation of monetary benefits in lieu of the past services rendered by the employee. 5. There is no dispute about the fact that the petitioner was entitled to the benefit of voluntary retirement in terms of Rule 74(b) of the Bihar Service Code. Voluntary retirement request was considered and accepted by the Government. We have not been able to comprehend as to why period of service from 1966 to 1983 put in by the original petitioner, appellant before us, should be excluded from the pensionary benefits. Voluntary retirement request was considered and accepted by the Government. We have not been able to comprehend as to why period of service from 1966 to 1983 put in by the original petitioner, appellant before us, should be excluded from the pensionary benefits. It is, therefore, clear that the pensionary benefits issue when being considered the past service has to be reckoned with and tagged with the total period of pensionable service. It is in these context, we are of the clear opinion, that the impugned judgment of the learned Single Judge requires interference and, in our opinion, the original writ petitioner, appellant before us, is entitled to the pensionary benefits taking the service from 1966 to 1983. 6. Let it be recalled as such, the Department of the concerned Government had, already, issued a certificate and had recommended for pension taking that period of service but only when the matter went to accountant Generals office somebody raised objection as to how full pension be allowed to the appellant for his past service rendered before the school was taken over and that created an issue and that is the reason why the original writ petitioner had to initiate a legal battle claiming for his pensionary benefits which is the real fact. 7. Be that as it may, we have no any hesitation in holding that the petitioner, appellant before us, is entitled to full pensionary benefits. The objection raised by the Accountant General is not tenable. The case of the original petitioner will be immediately taken up by the Accountant General and processed and, accordingly, pensionary benefits shall be accorded to him within three months from today. 8. With this observation, this Letters Patent Appeal shall stand allowed. However, there shall be no order as to costs.