JUDGMENT : Petitioner, who was employed under the Bihar State Electricity Board at the Patratu Thermal Power Station, Patratu, Hazaribagh, had superannuated in the post of Chief Engineer (Current Charge) on 30.09.2000. After his retirement, he submitted his representation on 19.12.2000 before the concerned authorities praying for fixation of his pension etc. and for payment of other retiral dues. He was informed by the concerned authorities that due to non-receipt of the statements from the Electricity Department, Government of Bihar, regarding his pension contribution for the period of his deputation from 20.02.1973 to 22.06.1979, his pension papers could not be cleared. He was however assured that his case would be considered after consideration of the case of one S. K. Singh whose similar matter was pending. The petitioner requested the Respondent-Board to pay the rest of his retrial dues by retaining the relevant amount pertaining to the aforesaid period, from the Leave Encashment Head. Later, on 13.02.2001, the petitioner received an intimation from the Joint Secretary, B.S.E.B., Patna (Respondent No. 5) that the amount calculated at Rs.53,201.16 Paise pertaining to the aforementioned Deputation period of the petitioner, cannot be deducted from the Leave encashment Head but such deduction can be made only from the Gratuity amount. On the petitioner’s acceptance of the proposal, the aforesaid amount was paid to him. 2. When despite, considerable lapse of time and repeated representations filed by him the amount of leave encashment for 240 days to the extent of Rs.1,39,452.41 Paise was not paid to him, the petitioner filed a writ petition vide W.P. (S) No. 4756 of 2003, before this Court. The writ petition was disposed of by this Court by order dated 19.09.2003, directing the petitioner to submit a fresh representation stating the details of his claim before the concerned authorities of the Bihar State Electricity Board, Patna. The petitioner accordingly, filed his representation. In reply, he was informed by the Secretary, B.S.E.B., Patna that the payment of leave encashment, Group Insurance etc. has to be made by the Sanctioning Authority i.e. the General Manager, P.T.P.S. under the Respondent- J.S.E.B. and the other amounts of retiral dues like arrears of D.C.R., Gratuity and Pension etc. would be released only after the decision of the Board regarding the mode and extent of payment. 3. has to be made by the Sanctioning Authority i.e. the General Manager, P.T.P.S. under the Respondent- J.S.E.B. and the other amounts of retiral dues like arrears of D.C.R., Gratuity and Pension etc. would be released only after the decision of the Board regarding the mode and extent of payment. 3. Being aggrieved by the indecision of the concerned Respondents-authorities over payment of his retiral benefits, the petitioner filed the present writ application praying for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing and commanding upon the concerned Respondents-authorities, especially the Respondent No. 4 and the Respondent nos. 6, 7 and 8 to immediately and forthwith make payment of all post-retiral dues of the petitioner which include (a) the arrears of revised Gratuity to the tune of Rs. 1,75,842.50 (b) arrear of duty payment in the revised New Pay scale calculated at Rs. 1,95,691.95 (c) arrear of unutilized leave encashment in New scale to the tune of Rs. 68,212.75 (d) arrear of C.L.A. and for a further direction to pay all such admitted retiral dues alongwith the interest @ 12 % per annum. 4. The contention of the petitioner is that the Respondents have illegally withheld all admitted retiral dues of the petitioner although all the similar post-retiral dues have been paid by the Respondents-J.S.E.B. to the other employees, namely, R.K. Mitra and B.K. Pore both of whom had also retired from the Patratu Thermal Power Station, Patratu, Hazaribagh prior to the reorganization of the State. It is further contended that under the Circular dated 21.01.2004 issued by the Secretary. J.S.E.B., Ranchi a decision was taken, whereby the J.S.E.B. had undertaken the liability to pay the retiral dues of all such employees including those who retired/died prior to the reorganization of the State from the places, which fell within the territorial jurisdiction of the State of Jharkhand, subject to the final allocation of the assets and liabilities between the J.S.E.B. and the B.S.E.B. by the competent authorities. Such decision was taken pursuant to an Agreement between the B.S.E.B. and the J.S.E.B. on 27.12.2003 and the same was approved even by the Supreme Court in the case of Jharkhand State Electricity Board-versus-Bihar State Electricity Board in Civil Appeal No. 1652 of 2004. Such decision was taken pursuant to an Agreement between the B.S.E.B. and the J.S.E.B. on 27.12.2003 and the same was approved even by the Supreme Court in the case of Jharkhand State Electricity Board-versus-Bihar State Electricity Board in Civil Appeal No. 1652 of 2004. On the basis of the aforesaid decision of the J.S.E.B., the petitioner had submitted a fresh representation before the Secretary, J.S.E.B., Ranchi, requesting payment of his all post-retiral dues but the same has not been given to him. 5. Counter affidavits have been filed on behalf of the Respondents-Bihar State Electricity Board as also by the Jharkhand State Electricity Board. 6. From the counter affidavit of the Respondents-B.S.E.B., it appears that the controversy arose in the matter of retiral dues to the employees who were employed under the Bihar State Electricity Board and who had retired prior to the date of reorganization of the State on 15.11.2004 from the territories, which later fell within the State of Jharkhand. Several retired employees like the petitioner filed writ applications before this Court. Two such aggrieved employees, namely, R.K. Mitra and B.K. Pore had also filed their writ applications. Both of whom had retired while working in the Patratu Thermal Power Station, Patratu, Hazaribagh under the Bihar State Electricity Board, claiming payment of their retiral dues, which was held up on account of the dispute between the two State Electricity Boards. A similar issue came up for consideration before this Court in the case of Akhileshwar Prasad-versus-Jharkhand State Electricity Board and others vide W.P. (S) No. 4887 of 2005 and analogous cases. Vide its judgment dated 31st March, 2006, a Division Bench of this Court held that the Respective Boards should pay the pensionary dues and other arrears to the employees retired/retiring from the areas which now fall under their jurisdiction, subject to final accounting/adjustment of their liabilities. The J.S.E.B. preferred a Special Leave Petition vide S.L.P. (C) No. 8618 of 2006 before the Hon’ble Supreme Court. By an interim order dated 06.07.2006, the Supreme Court modified the order passed by the Division Bench in the case of Akhileshwar Prasad (Supra), directing the Bihar State Electricity Board to continue to pay the pensionary benefits till the disposal of the Special Leave Petition. In consonance with the aforesaid interim order of the Supreme Court, this Court in the writ application filed by Binay Kr. In consonance with the aforesaid interim order of the Supreme Court, this Court in the writ application filed by Binay Kr. Pore in W.P. (S) No. 6908 of 2005 vide order dated 17.07.2006, had directed the B.S.E.B., Patna to continue to pay the pensionary benefits to the said Binay Kr. Pore till the disposal of the aforesaid Special Leave Petition. It is further informed that in the aforesaid Special Leave Petition, the Supreme Court by its interim order dated 08.02.2006 directed the Central Government to resolve the dispute between the two State Electricity Boards as to who should pay the pensionary benefits to the employees of the erstwhile Bihar State Electricity Board, who had retired before the appointed date. Pursuant to the orders of the Supreme Court, the Government of India, Ministry of Power decided the issue on 03.11.2006 that the employees of the erstwhile Bihar State Electricity Board who had retired before the appointed date, shall be paid by the successor State from where all such employees were drawing pension as on 01.04.2001. It was further decided that for the apportionment of the pension in respect of all the employees who retired after the dissolution of the erstwhile Bihar State Electricity Board, shall be guided by the arrangement enunciated in Schedule VIII of the Bihar Reorganization Act. Considering the aforesaid decision taken by the Government of India, the Hon’ble Supreme Court disposed of the aforesaid S.L.P. directing the parties to act in accordance with Clause III and Clause IV of the decision taken by the Government of India. 7. Mr. Rajendra Krishna, learned counsel appearing for the J.S.E.B. would explain that under Clause III of the decision of the Government of India, the pensionary benefits to all the employees of the erstwhile Bihar State Electricity Board, who retired before the appointed date, shall be paid by the successor of the Electricity Boards under whom such employees were performing their duties as on 01.04.2001, meaning thereby that the pensionary benefits shall be payable to the employees from where they retired as on 01.04.2001. Learned counsel explains further that since the petitioner was getting his pension from the B.S.E.B., Patna, therefore, his pensionary benefits including his retiral dues is payable by the B.S.E.B., Patna and not by the J.S.E.B., Ranchi. .8. Mr. Learned counsel explains further that since the petitioner was getting his pension from the B.S.E.B., Patna, therefore, his pensionary benefits including his retiral dues is payable by the B.S.E.B., Patna and not by the J.S.E.B., Ranchi. .8. Mr. Manoj Tandon, learned counsel for the B.S.E.B., Patna would explain on the other hand that pursuant to the decision taken by the Central Government, which was approved by the Supreme Court in the S.L.P., the B.S.E.B. has been paying the pension to the retired employees, including the petitioner, who had retired prior to the reorganization of the State from the territorial jurisdiction which subsequently fell within the State of Jharkhand but the claim of the petitioner in the instant case is for other retiral dues. .Learned counsel explains that in the instant case, the claim of the petitioner is not for pension but for other retiral benefits and is also in respect of arrears of payable salary in the revised New pay-scale to the tune of Rs.1,95,691.95 Paise as claimed in Para 1 of the writ application. Since the claim is for arrears of salary, the same has to be paid by the local authorities where the petitioner was posted at the time of his retirement on 30.09.2000. Learned counsel submits that except the arrears of salary, the Respondent-Bihar State Electricity Board acknowledges its liability to continue to pay the pension and retirement benefits to the petitioner. 9. By an earlier order dated 06.10.2007, passed in this writ application, the Respondent-Bihar State Electricity Board was directed to pay the amount of Rs.1,75,842.50 Paise towards the payments of arrears of revised Gratuity and Rs. 68,212.75 Paise towards unutilised leave encashment to the petitioner within two weeks from the date of the order. In compliance with the order, the Respondents-B.S.E.B. had paid the payable amounts towards Gratuity. On the statement of the petitioner that the amount towards unutilised leave encashment was not paid to him, a direction was issued to the Respondent-B.S.E.B. to verify the fact and file necessary documents to show that the amount towards unutilised leave encashment has been paid as claimed by the learned counsel for the B.S.E.B., Patna. 10. As would appear from the above facts, the B.S.E.B. has acknowledged its liability to pay to the petitioner the Gratuity and the unutilized leave encashment amount. 10. As would appear from the above facts, the B.S.E.B. has acknowledged its liability to pay to the petitioner the Gratuity and the unutilized leave encashment amount. As regards the petitioner’s remaining claim for payment of arrears of duty pay in the revised pay scale to the tune of Rs.1,95,691.95 Paise, which claim amounts to claim for arrears of salary, considering the terms of agreement between the B.S.E.B. and the J.S.E.B. and the settlement made by the Central Government vide its decision dated 03.11.2006, the liability to pay the arrears of salary should squarely fall upon the J.S.E.B. since the petitioner had retired while working at the Patratu Thermal Power Station, Patratu, Hazaribagh, which now falls within the territorial jurisdiction of the State of Jharkhand. 11. Mr. Rajendra Krishna, learned counsel for the Respondents-J.S.E.B. would submit that a direction to the J.S.E.B. to pay the arrears of salary would entail extreme inconvenience both to the J.S.E.B. as well as to the B.S.E.B. since the matter would not remain confined only to the petitioner because several other such retired employees have also staked their claim for payment of arrears of salary. Learned counsel explains that since such retired employees by their option have been receiving payment of pension from the B.S.E.B., their service records have been retained by the B.S.E.B. and it would be very inconvenient to call for all such service records only for the purpose of calculating the arrears of salary on the revised pay-scales in respect of each such employee. 12. The above argument of the learned counsel for the J.S.E.B. does not appear to be persuasive. 12. The above argument of the learned counsel for the J.S.E.B. does not appear to be persuasive. Since the matter involves only the calculation of the arrears on the revised scales and the number of claimants being not alarmingly high, the service records of all such retired employees, who have submitted their respective claim for payment of the arrears of salary on the revised pay-scale, may be obtained by the Respondent-J.S.E.B. from the office of the B.S.E.B. and after computing the payable amounts, would return the service records to the office of the B.S.E.B. Alternatively, with the cooperation of the concerned authorities of the B.S.E.B., such calculation may be made by the B.S.E.B. and authenticated statements of the amounts calculated in respect of each of the retired employees may be forwarded to the concerned authorities of the J.S.E.B. and on receipt of the same, the J.S.E.B. would release the payments to the retired employees including the petitioner. Since the Respondent-J.S.E.B. is liable to pay the amounts of arrears of salary on the revised pay-scale to the petitioner, it is directed that the Respondent-J.S.E.B. shall complete the modalities and ensure that the payment is released to the petitioner within a period of four months from the date of this order. 13. With the above observation, this writ application stands disposed of. 14. Let a copy of this order be given to the learned counsels for the Respondents-J.S.E.B. as also to the Respondents-B.S.E.B.