Dismissed

34540 Bihar Pradesh Prathmic Shikshak Morcha and Ors. v. State Of Bihar and Anr.

Patna HC4 Apr 2016L.P.A/137/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Patna High Court dismissed a Letters Patent Appeal challenging an order rejecting appellants' claim for regular pension. The Court held that appellants appointed via 2013 advertisement were bound by the New Contributory Pension Scheme conditions, precluding claims under older Bihar Pension Rules.

What did the court decide?

Letters Patent Appeal is dismissed. The order of the Learned Single Bench of the High Court dated 23.01.2014 is affirmed.

34540 Bihar Pradesh Prathmic Shikshak Morcha… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Patna HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

¶2

Letters Patent Appeal No.137 of 2015 Arising out of

¶3

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 307 of 2014

¶4

=================================================== 1. 34540 Bihar Pradesh Prathmic Shikshak Morcha, Patna through its President Vijay Kishor Sinha, Office at A/18 Ajad Path Saristabad, Gardanibagh, Police Station- Gardanibagh, District- Patna. 2. Vijay Kishore Sinha, Son of Late Chandra Kumar Singh, resident of Village-Barhara, Police Station- Charpokhari, District- Bhojpur. 3. Sri Prakash, son of Sri Rajbala Ram, resident of village- Bach Bobari, Police Station- Manikpur, District- Bhojpur.

¶5

.... .... Appellants Versus 1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna. 2. The Director, Primary Education, Government of Bihar, Patna.

¶6

.... .... Respondents

¶7

=================================================== Appearance : For the Appellants : Mr. Rajendra Prasad, Sr. Advocate. Mr. Ranjit Kumar Yadav, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Rajesh Kumar, A.C. to G.P. 28

¶8

=================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA) Date: 04-04-2016

¶9

I.A. No. 575 of 2015

¶10

This application is for condonation of delay of 182 days in

¶11

Patna High Court LPA No.137 of 2015 dt.04-04-2016

¶12

2 /4

¶13

filing the Letters Patent Appeal.

¶14

For the reasons mentioned in the Interlocutory Application, we are satisfied that the appellants have shown sufficient cause to seek condonation of delay of 182 days in filing the present Letters Patent Appeal.

¶15

Consequently, Interlocutory Application No. 575 of 2015 is allowed and delay of 182 days in filing the present Letters Patent Appeal is condoned.

¶16

L.P.A. No. 137 of 2015

¶17

Heard learned counsel for the appellants and the State.

¶18

The present Letters Patent Appeal is directed against an order passed by the learned Single Bench of this Court on 23^rd of January, 2014 in C.W.J.C. No. 307 of 2014, whereby the claim of the appellants that they are entitled to regular pension under the Bihar Pension Rules was rejected, as there was a categorical condition in the advertisement in pursuance of which the appellants were appointed, that the appellants will be subject to the scheme of New Contributory Pension Scheme.

¶19

The argument of the learned counsel for the appellants is that the vacancies, against which the appellants were appointed, were pertaining to the year 2003 when admittedly, Bihar Pension Rules were applicable. Therefore, the appellants were entitled to regular pension under the Bihar Pension Rules and not under the New Contributory

¶20

Patna High Court LPA No.137 of 2015 dt.04-04-2016

¶21

3 /4

¶22

Pension Scheme.

¶23

We do not find any merit in the said argument. Firstly, the appellants responded to an advertisement published in the year 2013 which contained a specific condition that the applicants will be governed by the New Contributory Pension Scheme. Once the appellants have responded in response to an advertisement where there is a categorical condition that the appellants will be subject to the scheme of provisions of New Contributory Pension Scheme, it is not open to them to claim regular pension under the Bihar Pension Rules. The appellants would be bound by the terms of advertisement on the basis of which the appellants competed and were selected for appointment. On the day of appointment, it was New Contributory Pension Scheme alone which was in force.

¶24

It is further argued that in case of certain appointments made in the year 2011, the State has granted regular pension under the Bihar Pension Rules.

¶25

A perusal of the record shows that appointments in the year 2011 were made in pursuance of advertisement issued in the year 1988. Obviously, at that time, Bihar Pension Rules were applicable and not the New Contributory Pension Scheme, which came into force in the year 2005. Therefore, there could not be any stipulation of governing the appointees by the New Contributory Pension Scheme.

¶26

In view of the above, we do not find any error in the order

¶27

Patna High Court LPA No.137 of 2015 dt.04-04-2016

¶28

4 /4

¶29

passed by the learned Single Bench which may warrant interference in the present intra court appeal.

¶30

The Letters Patent Appeal is, thus, dismissed.

¶31

(Hemant Gupta, J)

¶32

(Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J) P.K.P./Sujit N.A.F.R.

¶33

34540 Bihar Pradesh Prathmic Shikshak Morcha and Ors. v. State Of Bihar and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

34540 Bihar Pradesh Prathmic Shikshak Morcha and Ors. v. State Of Bihar and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vinod Kumar Rai and Anr. Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Wakil Singh Vs The Union Of India and Ors.

Tapan Kumar Chatterjee Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Baijnath Prasad Vs The Central Bank Of India and Ors.

Shivadhar Singh Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

The Central Bank Of India and Ors. Vs Baijnath Prasad