BINDESHWARI PRASAD AMBASTHA Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has filed this writ petition for direction on the respondents to pay the petitioner pensionary benefit, treating the petitioner as a State Government employee though the petitioner retired from the services of the Bihar State Road Transport Corporation.

(2.) THE petitioner was initially appointed on 6.2.1951 under the Transport Department of the State of Bihar as lower division assistant. Subsequently, the respondents constituted Bihar State Rajya Transport Corporation in the year 1959 and by vitrue of one letter no. 3404 dated 30.4.59 the services of number of employees, including the petitioner, were transferred, and placed under the Corporation. The petitioner was a temporary State Government employee at that point of time (in the year 1959) and so he was absorbed under the Corporation. The petitioner ultimately retired from the service of the Corporation on 31.12.87 and received the post retirement benefits that is contributory provident find, gratuity etc. It is after about eight years of retirement of the petitioner from the Corporation, he has moved before this court by filing the present writ petition for treating him as a State Government employee so that he may be given the benefit of pension instead of contributory provident fund already received by him as back as in the year 1988. According to the counsel for the petitioner, the transfer of the petitioner to the Corporation was made in the year 1959 without the consent of the petitioner was itself illegal and it is for the said reason the petitioner should be treated as a State Government employee.

(3.) FROM the facts mentioned above, it is evident that the petitioner being a temporary State Government employee having been absorbed under the Corporation in the year 1959, (sic -ceased) to be a State Government employee since 1959. It is after about 36 to 37 years, the petitioner cannot challenge such absorption as was made in the year 1959. that too indirectly by filing a petition for post retirement benefit. Further, the petitioner having retired from service of the Corporation in December, 1987 and having received the contributory provident fund without any objection it is not open for him to claim pensionary benefit by treating him as a State Government employee. This court finds no merit in the writ petition. Accordingly, the same in dismissed.