DEORLAJ SHARMA Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THERE is no reason that this matter should remain pending. The aspect is from which the date the petitioner -appellant will get his pension.

(2.) THE court has perused the record of the writ petition. The counter affidavit which has been filed in answer to the petition is shabby, sketchy and irresponsible. It avoids pleadings in the writ petition and gives no answer to the averments, which may have been made by the petitioner, such a defence by the State is not conducive to public justice.

(3.) THOUGH the matter may not be relevant, it is on record that the petitioner was made a Headmaster on 8 April 1963. Whatever may be the reason for administrative lapses, the managing committee of the institution had suspended him on 8 February 1968. The petitioner filed an appeal to the Control Board, the Regional Deputy Director Education, Patna Division, Patna. This authority took a decision recommending the reinstatement of the petitioner and posted the petitioner at Purnea High School. This aspect of a State authority dealing with the case of the petitioner is colateral evidence that he was in service,