SHAILANDRA KUMAR MISHRA Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Rajesh Kumar Sinha, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner; Mr. Jitendra Kumar, learned AC to AAG-9 for the State and Mr. Satya Vrat, learned counsel for the State Bank of India.

(2.) Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the petitioner was appointed in Rural Engineering Department, Chapra, Circle Muzaffarpur on 5/5/1980. He was transferred from Muzaffarpur to Bhagalpur and then to Munger. The State Government took a policy decision to merge Rural Engineering Department, Circle Muzaffarpur with Building Construction Department. The merger led to putting the post of peon/night guard and that of the Treasure guard in one cadre of Class-IV employee. Petitioner superannuated from service on 31/12/2016. Pension of the petitioner was fixed at Rs.6655.00 (Annexure-1) vide P.P.O. dtd. 22/3/2018.

(3.) Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the petitioner is aggrieved with the action of respondent-authority, particularly, the sanctioning authority who has discriminated him from one similarly situated Class-IV employee Pitambar Singh who had also retired on the same date as that of the petitioner i.e. 31/12/2016 and in his case pension has been fixed at Rs.7755.00 which would be evident from Annexure-2, the P.P.O. dtd. 8/5/2017 issued in favour of the said employee Pitambar Singh. Being aggrieved with the discrimination which has been shown to the petitioner, petitioner had filed the present writ petition. Learned counsel submits that the petitioner is also entitled for benefit of 7th Pay Revision and his pension should also be fixed at Rs.18573.00 as is being paid to said Pitambar Singh. The petitioner has already filed his representation claiming parity with Pitambar Singh on 6/1/2020 before the Executive Engineer, Building Construction Department, Munger Division.