Research › Search › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

2007 DIGILAW 597 (PAT)

Shail Kumari Devi v. State Of Bihar

2007-03-23

BARIN GHOSH, NAVANITI PRASAD SINGH

body2007
Judgment Barin Ghosh and Navaniti Pd.Singh JJ. 1. The appellant entered pensionable Government service on 6th May, 1961 and since then until 31st May, 1975, she was discharging the duties attached to the post held by her. On 31st December, 1993, appellant reached the age of her superannuation. Subsequent to that, she asked for pension. This having been denied, she approached the writ court. The writ court felt that inasmuch as no proceeding was initiated against the petitioner under Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules or the Bihar and Orissa Subordinate Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1935, terminating the services of the petitioner for continued absence for more than five years in terms of Rule 76 of the Bihar Service Code, the appellant cannot be treated to be a terminated employee of the Government and accordingly upheld the right of the appellant to receive pension. 2. In the present appeal the appellant is contending that while the writ court has upheld the pensionable service of the appellant from 6th May, 1961 to 31st May, 1975, this should be deemed to be from 31st May, 1961 to 31st December, 1993, inasmuch as the appellant attended the age of superannuation on 31st December, 1993 and did superannuate as holder of a pensionable service on that date. 3. Pension is payable in acknowledgment of service rendered. Admittedly, appellant did not serve from 1 st June, 1975 to 31st December, 1993. i.e. for 18 and 1/ 2 years, but she is asking pension to be calculated for that period also. For the purpose of calculating service, period to fix pension in accordance with the rules, the actual service rendered should be taken note of. A person while discharging his duties is entitled to various leaves. Beyond such leaves the period a Government employee does not render service, such period cannot be taken note of for the purposes of fixation of pension. 4. In the instant case, the appellant having not worked for a single day from 1st June,1975 to 31st December, 1993 did not earn anything as a government employee. No part of the said period can be included for the purposes of calculation of her pension. 4. In the instant case, the appellant having not worked for a single day from 1st June,1975 to 31st December, 1993 did not earn anything as a government employee. No part of the said period can be included for the purposes of calculation of her pension. In those circumstances, there is no scope of interference with the judgment and order impugned, inasmuch as the writ court has held that the appellant is entitled to count the period of service rendered by her from 6th May, 1961 to 31st May, 1975 for the purposes of pension and directed the appropriate authority to make payment of all post retiral dues including pension due to the appellant on account of rendering such service. 5. The appeal is, therefore, dismissed.