DEVAKI NANDAN PRASAD Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A pensioner since 16 years is knocking at the doors of the court of justice and the executive in search of his hard earned pension and is being rebuffed by these who would meet the same fate by the passage of time and yet with his meagre resources, he has been dragged to the apex court for the second time after a lapse of 12 years during which abominably long period the mandamus of this Court has been treated as a scrap of paper. What a pity, and what helplessness

(2.) The facts relevant to the disposal of this petition under Art. 32 of the Constitution are set out in details in Deokinandan Prasad v. State of Bihar, (1971) Supp SCR 634 : (AIR 1971 SC 1409) and therefore, need not be recapitulated here. A Constitution Bench presided over by the then Chief Justice Mr. Sikri issued a mandamus in the writ petition filed by the present petitioner which reads as under :

(3.) It may be mentioned in passing that the petitioner joined service on Sept. 1, 1928 and admittedly he has retired on superannuation on Jan. 10, 1967. He is entitled to pension under the Bihar Pension Rules, 1950. The dispute is whether the petitioner is a member of the Bihar Education Service and what ought to be the method of computation of his pension On the first point, the matter is no more res integra because the Constitution Bench held that a reference to R. 5 of the Pension Rules shows that the officers mentioned therein are entitled to pension. It was further held that there is no controversy that the petitioner is an officer in the Education Department of the Bihar Education Service, and this department is shown at Item No. 3 of the Schedule to R. 5. Therefore, the controversy is concluded by decision between the parties that the petitioner is a member of Bihar Education Service and that under R. 5 of the Pension Rules, he is entitled to pension.