RABINDRA NATH MANDA Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has filed the present writ application for a direction to quash the communication dated 18.9.1995, as contained in Annexure 6 to the writ petition, issued by the Senior Accounts Officer. Bihar Ranchi informing the petitioner that his pension and other retiral benefits have been correctly fixed and he is not entitled to fixation of his pension and other retiral benefits on the basis of presumptive pay fixation and the subsequent communication dated 14.6.1996 of the Accounts Officer, Bihar as contained in Annexure 9, reiterating the earlier decision that his pensionary benefits have been correctly fixed. The petitioner has also prayed to fix his pension and other post retirement benefits on the basis of the presumptive pay of the substantive post of Senior Accounts Clerk (Selection Grade) in Irrigation Department Government of Bihar, Patna to which post he held a lien till the date of his superannuation.

(2.) THE facts necessary for disposal of the present writ application are that the petitioner was appointed as Junior Accounts Clerk in the Irrigation Department in 1955. He was promoted as Senior Accounts Clerk in the year 1960. On 19.4.1979, he was put on deputation and posted as Emergency Divisional Accountant and was transferred to Minor Irrigation Division, Sahebganj, where he joined the post on 28.5.1997. He continued on the post of Emergency Divisional Accountant but he was not confirmed on the said post as he did not pass the necessary examination and his lien on substantive post of Senior Accounts Clerk in Irrigation Department, Government of Bihar, continued. On 31.1.1994 he superannuated from the post of Emergency Divisional Accountant. Thereafter, his pension and other retiral benefits have been fixed on the basis of the salary drawn by the petitioner as Emergency Divisional Accountant or officiating basis.

(3.) THE grievance of the petitioner is that as he was not confirmed on the post of Emergency Divisional Accountant, he will be treated on deputation on the post of Emergency Divisional Accountant and he continued to be governed by the Pension Rules of the State Government, where he holds a lien and as such his pension would have been fixed on the basis of the salary, which he would have drawn had he not been deputed to the post of Emergency Divisional Accountant. If he would have remained in the State service, he would have drawn more salary than what he was drawing at the time of has retirement on the post of Emergency Divisional Accountant and as such his pension and other retiral benefits should be fixed on the presumptive pay and not the actual salary drawn by the petitioner at the time of his retirement.