Disposed

Birendra Kumar Singh and Ors. v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Patna HC1 Dec 2016CWJC/14118/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This single judge order accepted the petitioners' submission that their reverted period should be treated as work charge establishment. The court directed that this period be counted for pensionary benefits and ACP, following relevant precedents.

What did the court decide?

The period of reversion shall be treated as work charge establishment and counted for pensionary benefits and ACP.

Birendra Kumar Singh and Ors. Vs The State Of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Patna HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

¶2

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.14118 of 2013

¶3

===========================================================

¶4

Birendra Kumar Singh S/o Sri Ram Kishun Singh, resident of village + Post - Mou, Viya Vidyapati Nagar, District - Samastipur at present posted at Public Health Engineering Division, Ara

¶5

Kauleshwar Singh S/o Late Matuk Dhari Singh, resident of village + Post - Aram, Viya - Vikram, District - Patna at present posted at Public Health Engineering Division, Ara

¶6

Nirantar Prasad S/o Sri Ramayan Singh resident of village - Piparhiya, P.O. Karwan, District - Ara (Bhojpur) at present posted at Public Health Engineering Division, Arra

¶7

Ram Kumar Singh S/o Jag Narayan Singh, resident of village - Parsada, P.O. - Manikpur, Viya - Manoharpur, District - Buxar, at present posted at Public Health Engineering Division, Arra

¶8

Madan Mohan Prasad S/O Sri Khedu Prasad, resident of village - Shubhkaran Ganj, P.O. - Daulatpur, District - Bhojpur (Arrah), at present posted at Public Health Engineering Division, Arra

¶9

Sri Bhagwan Singh S/o Sri Vishwanath Singh resident of village + Post - Funha, District - Bhojpur (Arrah), at present posted at Public Health Engineering Division, Arra

¶10

Ramun Prasad S/o Sri Birwal Prasad, resident of village - Keshopur Bakri, P.O. - Karwan, P.S. - Udwantnagar, District - Bhojpur (Arrah), at present posted at Public Health Engineering Division, Arra

¶11

Radhepal S/o Late Sri Suwa Lala Pal, resident of village/Mohalla - Jankisthan, Gaushala Road, Mandal Nagar, Ward No. 2, District - Sitamarhi, at present posted at Public Health Engineering Division, Arra

¶12

Kedarnath Singh S/o Sri Muldeo Singh, resident of village + Post - Fuanha, District - Bhojpur (Arrah), at present posted at Public Health Engineering Division, Arra

¶13

Lal Bhushan Prasad S/o Late Makhan Prasad, resident of village + Post - Bhalaur, Viya - Charpokhari, District - Arrah, at present posted at Public Health Engineering Division, Arra

¶14

Bharosa Prasad S/o Late Mahendra Prasad, resident of village - Keshopur, Bakhari, P.O. - Karwan, P.S. - Udwant Nagar, District - Bhojpur, at present posted at Public Health Engineering Division, Ara

¶15

Lal Bihari Singh S/o Late Devnath Singh, resident of village + Post - Aran Viya Vikram, District - Patna, at present posted at Public Health Engineering Division, Arra

¶16

Garjan Ram S/o Late Jugan Ram, resident of village - Bahire, Post - Nawada, P.S. - Nawada, District - Bhojpur, at present posted at Public Health Engineering Division, Arra .... .... Petitioner/s

¶17

Versus

¶18

The State of Bihar through its Commissioner-cum-Secretary, to Govt. Public Health Engineering Department

¶19

The Chief Engineer (Mechanical), Public Health Engineering Department, Bisheshariya Bhawan, Baily Road, Patna

¶20

The Superintending Engineer, Public Health Engineering Circle, Ara

¶21

The Executive Engineer, Public Health Division, Ara

¶22

... .... Respondent/s

¶23

===========================================================

¶24

Patna High Court CWJC No.14118 of 2013 dt.01-12-2016

¶25

2/3

¶26

Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Lalan Kumar Singh For the Respondent/s : Mr. Manoj Kr. Ambastha

¶27

=========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVAJI PANDEY ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 01-12-2016

¶28

The small issue has been raised by the petitioners that

¶29

they were working as daily wages employees, later on, they were allowed to work as work charge establishment for the period from 1^st June 2002 to 30^th November 2006 and thereafter, the order was passed by the State, thereby reverted back them as daily wages employees which generated litigation before this Court and such type of orders were passed not only against the petitioners but against the large number of persons, on that account, petitioners and others approached this Court in C.W.J.C. No. 706 of 2002 and the Court passed the following order dated 14.01.2002 (Annexure-2).

¶30

“The reduction of pay will be subject to the result of

¶31

the case.”

¶32

In pursuance of the order of Division Bench, ThreeMen Committee was constituted. The cases of the petitioners and others were considered and ultimately they have been absorbed, vide Office Order no. 194 dated 1^st December 2006.

¶33

The counsel for the petitioners submits that the period petitioners were reverted, has been treated to be a period of work charge establishment, as the petitioners and others have been paid the salary for the period from 1^st June 2002 to 30^th November 2006.

¶34

Patna High Court CWJC No.14118 of 2013 dt.01-12-2016

¶35

3/3

¶36

The question is limited whether the period petitioners were reverted, will be treated as work charge establishment or will be treated as daily wages, as the payment has been made by the State treating the petitioners as work charge establishment. The next question would be that the aforesaid period will also be counted for the purposes of pensionary benefit as well as the ACP. The State has not disputed the principle that the period of work charge establishment would also be counted for the purposes of pensionary benefit as well as the ACP provided in case of their absorption in the regular establishment which is apparently clear from the judgment reported in 2014 (4) PLJR 229 (State of Bihar vs. Bhagwan Singh) and the orders passed by this Court in C.W.J.C. No. 11696 of 2013 (Vijay Kumar and others vs. State of Bihar and others) and C.W.J.C. No. 14439 of 2013 (Kapileshwar Ray vs. State of Bihar and others).

¶37

In such view of the matter, the period aforesaid be treated for the purposes of pensionary benefit and A.C.P. The Annexure-7 will be read accordingly.

¶38

With the above observation/direction, this petition is

¶39

disposed of.

¶40

(Shivaji Pandey, J)

¶41

Mahesh/-

¶42

AFR/NAFR	NAFR
CAVDATE	N/A
UploadingDate	09/12/2016
Transmission Date

Birendra Kumar Singh and Ors. v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Birendra Kumar Singh and Ors. 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ravi Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Md. Sohrab @ Md. Shrab Vs The State Of Bihar

Md. Margub Vs The State Of Bihar

Narendra Prasad Singh Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Sharmila Sinha Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Priyanka Kumari Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.