This order dismissed the petitioner's writ petition seeking pension benefits counting service with a Corporation. The bench relied on a Full Bench decision holding that such employees are not entitled to count Corporation service for pension and pro-rata basis applies.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.11000 of 2018
======================================================
Chandradip Mahto S/o late Yaddu Mahto Resident of Village Goraul, P.S. Goraul, Distt. Vaishali (Senior Clerk Retd.), District- Consumer Form Muzaffarpur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
... ... Respondent/s
====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Kaushal Kishor, Adv. For the State : Mr. S. Raza Ahmad- Aag5 Mr. Vishwambhar Prasad, AC to AAG-5 For the AG : Mr. Arun Kumar Arun, Adv. For BSFC : Mr. Nirmal Kumar, Adv.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. NILU AGRAWAL ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 19-12-2018
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned
counsel for the State and learned counsels appearing on behalf of the Bihar State Food and Civil Supplies Corporation (BSFC) and Accountant General, Bihar, Patna.
Petitioner seeks payment of pension and retiral benefits on the basis of his initial appointment on the post of Clerk in the Bihar State Food and Civil Supplies Corporation on 15.03.1974
Patna High Court CWJC No.11000 of 2018 dt.19-12-2018 2/3
but from 08.04.1997 the petitioner was absorbed with the State Government and superannuated on 31.07.2014. He prays for counting of the period spent with the Bihar State Food and Civil Supplies Corporation (hereinafter referred to as the “Corporation”) for pensionary benefits as he submits that the period spent in the Corporation was 15.03.1974 to 07.04.1997.
Learned counsel for the State has brought to my notice a Full Bench decision in the case of Harishankar Prasad Vs. The State of Bihar in (CWJC No. 13495/2008) and other analogous cases decided on 01.11.2018 wherein similar matters have come up for consideration and the Full Bench has ordered thus:
“In view of the above and for the reasons stated above, it is held that the respective writ petitioners being the employees of the erstwhile Corporation shall not be entitled to pension/pensionary benefits/total gratuity counting their services rendered by them with the Corporation and that the State Government is justified in paying the pension/pensionary benefits to the concerned retired employees on pro-rata basis counting their services rendered by
Patna High Court CWJC No.11000 of 2018 dt.19-12-2018 3/3
them with the State Government only. All the
writ petitions stand dismissed, accordingly.”
Considering that the matter is already decided by the Full
Bench, petitioner is not entitled to any relief.
The writ application stands dismissed, accordingly.
(Nilu Agrawal, J)
kamlesh/-
| AFR/NAFR | NAFR |
|---|---|
| CAV DATE | NA |
| Uploading Date | 20.12.2018 |
| Transmission Date | NA |
2 issues framed by the court
Whether an employee absorbed by the State Government is entitled to count service rendered with the erstwhile Corporation for pensionary benefits.
Whether the petitioner is entitled to any relief in view of the Full Bench decision in Harishankar Prasad Vs. The State of Bihar.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Harishankar Prasad Vs. The State of BiharFollowed¶27
(CWJC No. 13495/2008)
Chandradip Mahto
The State of Bihar through its Secretary
Nilu Agrawal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
