YOGENDRA PRASAD ROY Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has filed the present writ application for direction upon the respondent authorities to make payment of differential amount of unutilized leave salary and gratuity at the revised rate on the basis of recommendation of the 6th Pay Commission, the differential amount of pension by re-fixing the pension of the petitioner taking into consideration 20 years qualifying period of service and the differential amount of salary by re-fixing the salary since Jan., 2006.

(2.) It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner was appointed in the year 1976 as Deputy Collector and he retired on attaining the age of superannuation on 31st March, 2007. He submitted that pursuant to the recommendation of 6th Pay Commission, the pay of the petitioner ought to have been revised with effect from 1st Jan., 2006 and his pension ought to have been re-fixed pursuant to his retirement on 31st March, 2007. He submitted that the petitioner is entitled to receive full pension as he has completed more than 20 years of qualifying service, but the respondents are paying him pension on pro-rata basis.

(3.) Per contra, learned counsel for the State submitted that the Government of Bihar decided to extend the benefit of full pension and family pension in lieu of 20 years of service for those employees who retired on or after 01.04.2007. She submitted that since the petitioner retired on 31st March, 2007, he was not entitled to receive full pension on the basis of qualifying service of 20 years. She further contended that the monetary benefit of pension pursuant to 6th Pay Commission Report has also been extended to the employees of the State Government with effect from 01.04.2007 and, hence, petititioner would not be entitled to receive revised pensionary benefits in the light of the recommendations made by the 6th Pay Commission.