Bikramaditya Singh v. State of Bihar through the Commissioner-cum-Secretary, Rural Development Department
2013-07-12
NAVANITI PRASAD SINGH
body2013
DigiLaw.ai
JUDGMENT 1. The petitioner had joined as Accountant-cum-Clerk in Zila Parishad, Munger. In due course he got seniority by virtue of length of service. In 1986 the Accountant-cum-Head Clerk of Zila Parishad of Munger superannuated. The petitioner was asked to officiate but that was cut short within a year and he was reverted to the post of Accountant-cum-Clerk. That was in 1987. As per petitioner’s own averment in 1992 he was transferred to Jamui Zila Parishad. In 2002 he filed a writ petition for a direction to Munger Zila Parishad to accept his joining, which writ petition was disposed of in 2007 directing the Executive Officer Munger Zila Parishad to consider the application and take an appropriate decision in the matter. The petitioner then superannuated in 2008. He was paid his retiral dues from Zila Parishad of Munger. 2. The petitioner by this writ petition claims that right from 1987 to the date of his superannuation in 2008 i.e. period of 20 years he should be paid his wages by Munger Zila Parishad. 3. Mr. S.D.Yadav, learned counsel for Zila Parishad of Munger submits that, in fact, the petitioner is lucky that he was given his retiral dues. The petitioner ought to have been dismissed of being on unauthorized leave for such a long time. These facts give a confusion of picture. The petitioner states that he was transferred to Jamui yet he seeks direction for joining in Munger. Munger Zila Parishad says that he has never worked in Munger after 1998. Thus, where he was for 20 years remain nebulous. In spite of such a situation upon his superannuation substantial money was paid to him as his retiral dues. In my view the petitioner should be thankful for having received all those retiral dues. In view of these disputed facts relating to his status and his un-explained absence for almost 20 years I am unable to direct that the petitioner be paid any amount allegedly for the period he was not allowed to join. 4. The writ petition is thus dismissed.