Allowed

Jagadish Prasad Sinha v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC13 Apr 2022CWJC/7583/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition, the Hon'ble Patna High Court held that lack of funds cannot negate statutory entitlement to 5th and 6th pay. The Court set aside an order rejecting claims and directed authorities to calculate and disburse arrears for specific intervening periods within four months or pay litigation costs.

What did the court decide?

Set aside impugned order; directed to calculate and disburse arrears of 5th and 6th pay for specific periods; directed to pay Rs. 10,000 litigation cost if arrears not paid within four months.

Jagadish Prasad Sinha Vs The State of Bihar — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Patna HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.7583 of 2021

¶2

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

¶3

Jagadish Prasad Sinha S/o Late Indra Lal Singh R/o Village- Chinia Bela, P.S. Punpun, Distt- Patna. Superannuated from the post of Surveyor cum InCharge Junior Engineer, Investigation and Planning Division, Gandak Area Development Agency Chhapra.

¶4

Chandeshwar Prasad Yadav S/o Late Ganga Prasad Yadav R/o VillageHabbipur, Post- Jatdumari, P.S.- Punpun, Distt- Patna. Superannuated from the post of Surveyor, Investigation and Planning Division, Gandak Area Development Agency Motihari, East Champaran.

¶5

Nageshwar Yadav S/o Late Deoki Prasad Yadav R/o Village- Habbipur, Post- Jatdumari, P.S.- Punpun, Distt- Patna. Superannuated from the post of Surveyor, Investigation and Planning Division, Gandak Area Development Agency Chapara Division, Saran.

¶6

Surendra Prasad Singh S/o Late Ram Nagina Singh R/o Vill and PostDariyapur, P.S. Parsa Bazar, Distt- Patna. Superannuated from the post of Surveyor, Investigation and Planning Division, Gandak Area Development Agency, Siwan.

¶7

Radha Pandey S/o Late Baleshwar Pandey R/o Village and Post- Dariyapur, P.S.- Parsa Bazar, Distt- Patna. Superannuated from the post of Treasurer Guard, form the office of Investigation and Planning Division, Gandak Area Development Agency, Muzaffarpur.

¶8

Om Prakash Singh S/o Late Sidheshwar Singh R/o MohallaNoormohiuddinpur (Shivnagar Road No. 2), Post- Punpun, P.S. Parsa Bazar, Distt- Patna. Superannuated from the post of Junior Engineer, form the office of Investigation and Planning Division, Gandak Area Development Agency, Bettiah, West Champaran.

¶9

7.1. Mostt Chinta Devi W/o Late Prem Sao @ Prem Kumar Gupta R/o MohallaNoormohiuddinpur (Shivnagar Road No.2), Post- Punpun, P.S.- Parsa Bazar, Distt- Patna.

¶10

... ... Petitioner/s Versus

¶11

The State of Bihar through the Secretary, Water Resources Department, Old Secretariat, Sichai Bhawan, Government of Bihar, Patna.

¶12

The Secretary, Water Resources Department, Old Secretariat, Sichai Bhawan, Government of Bihar, Patna.

¶13

The Principal Secretary, Department of Finance, New Secretariat, Government of Bihar, Patna.

¶14

The Director, Water and Land Management Institute (WALMI), Phulwari Sharif, Patna.

¶15

The Deputy Secretary, Command Area Development Directorate, Water Resources Department, Old Secretariat, Sichai Bhawan, Bihar, Patna.

¶16

The Superintending Engineer, Command Area Development Circle, Combined Building, Muzaffarpur.

¶17

Patna High Court CWJC No.7583 of 2021 dt.13-04-2022 2/5

¶18

... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

¶19

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Jai Prakash Verma, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr.Vinay Kirti Singh (GA2)

¶20

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

¶21

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. B. BAJANTHRI ORAL JUDGMENT

¶22

Date : 13-04-2022

¶23

Heard learned counsel for respective parties.

¶24

In the instant petition, petitioners have prayed for the

¶25

following reliefs:-

¶26

“(i) For quashing of aggrieved portion of order as contained in memo no. 368 dated 14.08.2020 passed by the Secretary, Water Resources Department (respondent no. 2) as contained in Annexure-18, whereby and where under claim of the petitioner no. 1 and others similarly situated persons to the petitioner no. 1 (who are petitioner no. 2 to 7 herein) with regard to grant of 5^th pay scale from January 2002 to December 2008 and 6^th pay scale from 1.4.2007 to 31.3.2012 has been rejected and it has been found wholly proper with regard to earlier grant of benefits under 5^th pay scale w.e.f. 1.1.2009 and 6^th pay scale w.e.f. 1.4.2012. And lastly the representation of the petitioner no. 1 has been rejected.

¶27

(ii) Further prayer for a direction to the respondents to grant to the petitioners arrears of 5^th pay scale w.e.f. January 2002 to December 2008 and arrears of 6^th pay scale w.e.f. 1.4.2007 till 31.3.2012 like state government employees as per resolutions of the finance department in this regard and further grant all consequential benefits to the petitioners along with suitable interest thereon as well as cost of litigation.

¶28

Patna High Court CWJC No.7583 of 2021 dt.13-04-2022 3/5

¶29

(iii) And for the other necessary relief/reliefs for which the petitioners are entitled to in accordance with law.”

¶30

This is third round litigation in respect of extending 5^th and 6^th pay to the petitioners. Petitioners are employees of the Gandak Area Development Agency (For short ‘GADA’). State Government extended 5^th and 6^th pay to its employees in the year 1996 w.e.f. 01.01.1996, similarly, in the year 2007 w.e.f. 01.04.2007. Insofar as extending 5^th and 6^th pay to the employees of GADA is concerned, it was adopted in giving effect from 01.01.1996 and 01.04.2007 respectively. However, the petitioners have not been extended 5^th and 6^th pay. With reference to the aforesaid date, on the other hand, the date of extending 5^th and 6^th pay is 01.01.2009 and 01.04.2012.

¶31

Thus, the petitioners feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied presented the petition and also exhausted the remedy of LPA wherein this Court remanded the matter to the State Government to hear the affected persons and proceed to pass the order. Thus, the State Government passed the impugned order after hearing the petitioners. Thus, grievance of 5^th and 6^th pay was agitated by association and individuals like petitioners. The State Government has taken a decision relating to financial constraint in the Agency, therefore, the petitioners’ entitlement of 5^th and 6^th pay has been

¶32

Patna High Court CWJC No.7583 of 2021 dt.13-04-2022 4/5

¶33

postponed from 01.01.1996 to 31.12.2001 and 01.04.2007 to 31.03.2012. Such financial constraint cannot be a hurdle for extending 5^th and 6^th pay which is due to the petitioners in terms of the policy evolved by the State Government and the same has been adopted by GADA. Postponement of granting 5^th and 6^th pay merely on the ground of financial constraint cannot be appreciated for the reasons that 5^th and 6^th pay Rules are statutory in character. Therefore, if the petitioners fulfil the eligibility criteria as on 01.01.1996 for 5^th pay and 01.04.2007 for 6^th pay they are entitled. Lack of money in the GADA Agency is not an answer for postponement of 5^th and 6^th pay benefit.

¶34

Accordingly, the present petition is allowed and the impugned order dated 14.08.2020 (Annexure-18) stands set aside so far as the petitioners are concerned.

¶35

The concerned authority is hereby directed to calculate and disburse the difference of amount in respect of 5^th and 6^th pay namely the intervening period from 01.01.1996 to 31.12.2001 and from 01.04.2007 to 31.03.2012. The same shall be calculated and disbursed to each of the petitioners including legal heirs of seventh petitioner within a period of four months from the date of receipt of this order failing which petitioners are entitled to litigation cost

¶36

Patna High Court CWJC No.7583 of 2021 dt.13-04-2022 5/5

¶37

@ Rs. 10,000/- each of the petitioners. The cost shall be paid if the

¶38

petitioners’ settlement is beyond four months.

¶39

Vikash/-

¶40

AFR/NAFR	NAFR
CAV DATE	N/A
Uploading Date
Transmission Date	N/A

Jagadish Prasad Sinha v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jagadish Prasad Sinha v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rakesh Kumar Raushan Vs The State of Bihar

Om Prakash Sah Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Ranjan Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Kr. Horo Rosa @ H. Rosa Vs The State of Bihar

Ajay Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Krishna Kumar Kanth Vs The State of Bihar