BABULAL MAHTO Vs. BIHAR STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the counsel appearing for the respondents.

(2.) The petitioner has filed this application for a direction to the respondents for payment of pension and death-cum-retiral gratuity, GPF with interest, Group Insurance and for payment of pay and allowances arising out of fixation of pay of the petitioner in the replacement scale with effect from 1.4.1996 and for release of salary and allowances of the petitioner for the period of deemed suspension from 11.4.1987 to 25.5.1987. The petitioner has also prayed for first time bound promotion with effect from 1.4.1981 and for second time bound promotion on completion of 25 years of his service with effect from 8.11.1992.

(3.) The petitioner was appointed on the post of Rigger and was posted at Patratu Thermal Power Station under Bihar State Electricity Board (hereinafter referred as the "Board"). His case is that after his superannuation he submitted his pension papers in time to the respondent No. 4, who sanctioned payment of leave salary for 132 days unutilised leave, 90% of the pension but with held 10% of the pension and whole of the death-cum- retiral gratuity. As per 4th Pay Revision Committee two promotion for the whole service of an employee has been provided as anti stagnation measure but no promotion was given to him during his entire period of service. He became eligible for grant of first time bound promotion with effect from 1.4.1981 and for second time bound promotion on completion of 25 years of his service with effect from 8.11.1992. It has been submitted that since the respondent Board has accepted all rules and regulations of the State Government pertaining to the services of its employees, the respondents are duty bound to grant two time bound promotions to the petitioner. It has also been submitted that with holding of 10% of pension and whole of gratuity is illegal as the Board is not competent to with hold whole or part of the amount of pension as well as gratuity. The pension and gratuity are the properties of the government servant and the right to receive it should not and cannot be taken away in a casual manner. The petitioner's counsel has placed reliance on some unreported decision annexed with the petition as well as the decision in the case of Bajrang Deo Narain Sinha v. The State of Bihar and Ors. reported in 1999 (3) PLJR 949.