MAHENDRA PRASAD SINGH Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsels for the parties. The writ application of the petitioner came to be filed after the respondents, especially the Accountant General, revised the pension of the petitioner from Rs. 14005/- to Rs. 12355/-. Since the reduction is by way of Annexure-6, dated 6th of January, 2011, the cause of action for the petitioner arose.

(2.) Whatever be the story, which has been narrated by the petitioner in the writ application, the fact stands that the petitioner, who was required to pass the departmental examination to beget him the benefit of a certain increments and a higher pay-scale, was not passed by him. In fact, an application was filed by him for exemption, but that exemption was refused by the State Government. Therefore, whatever advantage in terms of the increment and higher pay-scale, which the petitioner derived, knowing fully well that he did not participate, therefore, did not qualify in the examination was well known to him.

(3.) The Court is not willing to bite the line of arguments that there was no contribution of the petitioner in the fraud played, because by virtue of holding the high post of District Education Officer, he is and was expected to know the entitlement and in fact he had been given the additional benefit and higher pay-scale, which the petitioner quietly accepted, which shows lack of honesty on his part.