Allowed

Arbind Sharma v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Patna HC5 Nov 2015CWJC/15088/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed the writ petition quashing the order for recovery of benefits granted to a compilation clerk who failed the mandatory accounts examination. The Court directed respondents to recompute benefits from the date the petitioner passed the examination.

What did the court decide?

Writ application allowed to the extent of quashing the recovery order and directing respondents to recompute entitlement from the date of passing the examination.

Arbind Sharma Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors. — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Patna HC (2015)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

¶2

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.15088 of 2015

¶3

=========================================================== 1. Arbind Sharma son of Bhavsagar Singh Resident of Village - Mahuaar, P.O. - Munjhar, P.S. - Haspura, District - Aurangabad, at present residing at Anicut Road, P.O. and P.S. - Dehri-on-Sone, District - Rohtas at Sasaram. .... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Road Construction Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 2. The Principal Secretary, Road Construction Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 3. The Superintending Engineer (Mechanical), National Highway, Mechanical Circle, Patna. 4. The Executive Engineer (Mechanical), National Highway, Dehri-on-Sone Division, Dehri-on-Sone. 5. The Principal Secretary, Finance Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 6. The Special Secretary, Finance Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 7. The Commissioner, Tirhut Range, Muzaffarpur.

¶4

.... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Anjani Kumar Jha For the Respondent/s : Mr. Md. Raisul Haque- Sc4 =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 05-11-2015

¶5

Petitioner is working as a Compilation Clerk. Benefit of 1st time-bound promotion came to be given to him by the Superintending Engineer in terms of Annexure-1, dated 22.8.1996. He withdrew the advantage thereof. In a review meeting held by the screening committee, it was discovered that petitioner had not passed the accounts examination, which is mandatory for begetting any kind of promotion, which also includes time-bound promotion under the stagnation scheme. There is no dispute or arguments on this aspect of the matter as law is well settled.

¶6

Patna High Court CWJC No.15088 of 2015 dt.05-11-2015

¶7

2/2

¶8

Respondents, therefore, decided to cancel the benefit given to the petitioner w.e.f. 15.3.1993 and even effect recovery.

¶9

Coming to the recovery part of the order, keeping in view the latest decision rendered by the Apex Court in the case of State of Punjab and others vs. Rafiq Masih (White Washer) and others, (2015) 4 Supreme Court Cases 334 , where especially the Hon`ble Apex Court has held that recovery from Class III and IV employees ought not to be made, the order of recovery (Annexure-3) as well as Annexure -10 stands quashed.

¶10

However, so far as grant of benefit under various scheme of stagnation is concerned, that can only accrue in favour of the petitioner from the date he has passed the departmental examination, which is said to be 16.01.2010.

¶11

Writ application is allowed to the above extent, with a direction to the respondents that they will re-work the entitlement of the petitioner from the date he has passed the departmental examination.

¶12

(Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J)

¶13

Arbind Sharma v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arbind Sharma v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Priyanka Kumari Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Jay Mangal Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Firoj Ansari Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Aditi Tiwary Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Prabhat Lal and Ors. Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Prashant Kumar Vs Chairman, Bihar Combined Entrance Competitive Examination Board and Ors.