Research › Search › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

2009 DIGILAW 1016 (PAT)

State Of Bihar v. Union Of India

2009-08-03

ANJANA PRAKASH, SHIVA KIRTI SINGH

body2009
JUDGEMENT 1. Learned counsel for the State has relied upon provision in Rule 15(2) and Rule 20(4) of the All India Services (Leaves) Rules, 1955 to submit that the absence of respondent no. 2 for the period in question has been regularized by grant of extraordinary leave and such leave does not entitle him to any leave salary. On that basis he submits that even after hearing respondent no. 2 we should confirm the interim stay granted at the time of admission of this appeal on 16th July, 2008, and no direction should be made for payment of salary to respondent no. 2 for the period in question. 2. Learned counsel for the respondent no. 2 submits that non-payment of salary for the period 10.2.2002 to 28.4.2004 is not only causing financial loss to the amount of salary and other payable perks to respondent no. 2 but is also adversely affecting his right to receive due pension and other retiral benefits on account of his superannuation in July, 2008. 3. Learned counsel for the appellant, that is, the State of Bihar submits that once the period of absence has been regularized by granting extraordinary leave there shall not be any difficulty in sanctioning and paying the retiral dues to respondent no. 2 in accordance with law and he is not likely to suffer any injury in respect of his pension and other retiral benefits on account of interim stay by order dated 16th July, 2008. 4. In view of the aforesaid stand of the State Government, the prayer for vacating the stay order is not found fit to be allowed. The same is, accordingly, disposed of. 5. However, the appellant-State of Bihar and its concerned authorities are directed to ensure that pensionary benefits payable to respondent no. 2 in accordance with law are sanctioned and made available to him without any delay. If in spite of this order respondent no. 2 faces any difficulty and his retiral benefits including pension are not sanctioned and made available to him within a reasonable time he would be at liberty to file another application to this court. 6. It is made clear that this order shall not effect the claim of the parties in respect of the matter under controversy at the time of final hearing.