Disposed¶30

Bindu Kumar Verma v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC24 Apr 2025CWJC/3857/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Patna High Court; CWJC No.3857 of 2022; Bindu Kumar Verma v. State of Bihar & Ors.; decided 24-04-2025 by Justice Harish Kumar (oral order); post-retiral benefit difference; leave encashment 7th Pay Revision; 3rd MACP; matric trained scale arrears 04.02.2008 to 31.12.2008; Rs. 65,602/-; Rs. 46,218/-; letter no. 27 dated 02.04.2025; memo no. 653 dated 04.04.2025; Jamui; Department of Education Bihar; Accountant General; writ petition disposed with direction to credit amounts within four weeks.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed with the hope and expectation that the amounts disclosed in the counter affidavit (Rs. 65,602/- matric trained scale difference and Rs. 46,218/- leave encashment difference under 7th Pay Revision) be credited to the petitioner's account, if not credited till date, preferably within four weeks.

Bindu Kumar Verma Vs The State of Bihar — Patna HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶30

Issue for consideration

Whether the respondent authorities should be directed to pay the petitioner the difference of post-retiral benefits, including leave encashment, due to the 7th Pay Revision. +1 more

¶21

Court's answer

The amounts disclosed in the counter affidavit must be credited in the account of the petitioner, if not credited till date, preferably within a period of four weeks.

¶28

Ratio / Principle

Considering the averments made in the counter affidavit, the Court deemed it fit and proper to dispose of the writ petition with a hope and expectation that the amounts disclosed therein be credited to the petitioner's account.

¶26

Key takeaways

The Court observed that although the admissible amounts under the claimed heads had been calculated and an undertaking given for credit, it had not been informed whether the amounts had actually been credited.obiter¶25

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.3857 of 2022, Bindu Kumar Verma v. The State of Bihar and others (Patna High Court, Oral Order dated 24-04-2025, Harish Kumar, J). The petition sought directions for payment of the difference of post-retiral benefits including leave encashment due to the 7th Pay Revision, grant of 3rd MACP with consequential benefits, and arrears of matric-trained salary. In compliance with the Court's direction, respondent no. 6 filed a counter affidavit reporting that vide letter no. 27 dated 02.04.2025 a difference of Rs. 65,602/- on account of the matric-trained scale (04.02.2008 to 31.12.2008) had been accorded, and vide memo no. 653 dated 04.04.2025 the leave-encashment difference under the 7th Pay Revision stood calculated at Rs. 46,218/-, both undertaken to be credited. Noting that actual credit remained unconfirmed, the Court disposed of the writ petition with the hope and expectation that the disclosed amounts be credited, if not already done, preferably within four weeks. No statutory provision or precedent was invoked or discussed.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.3857 of 2022

¶2

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

¶3

Bindu Kumar Verma, Son of Late Bharat Bhushan Prasad, Resident of Village - Suggi, P.s. and District- Jamui.

¶4

... ... Petitioner/s

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Bihar.

¶7

The Principal Secretary/Additional Chief Secretary, Department of Education Bihar, Patna.

¶8

The Director Primary Education, Bihar, Patna.

¶9

The District Magistrate, Jamui.

¶10

The District Education Officer, Jamui.

¶11

The District Programme Officer (Est), Jamui.

¶12

The Headmaster Cum Drawing Disbursing Officer, P.D. Middle School, Jamui.

¶13

The Accountant General, Bihar Birchand Patel Path, Patna.

¶14

... ... Respondent/s

¶15

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

¶16

Appearance :

¶17

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rajesh Kumar Sinha, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Rajeev Pranjan, AC to GP-20 ======================================================

¶18

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL ORDER

¶19

8 24-04-2025 Heard the parties.

¶20

The present writ petition is filed seeking a direction

¶21

upon the respondent authorities to pay the difference of amount of post retiral benefit including the amount of leave encashment due to 7^th pay revision. The petitioner has further prayed for direction to the respondent to grant 3rd MACP to the petitioner alongwith its consequential benefits as well as arrears of salary of matric trained which is yet to be paid.

¶22

In compliance with the direction of this Court a

¶23

Patna High Court CWJC No.3857 of 2022(8) dt.24-04-2025 2/3

¶24

counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondent no. 6. Mr. Rajeev Ranjan, learned advocate for the State referring to the averments made in the counter affidavit has submitted that vide letter no. 27 dated 02.04.2025 the petitioner has been accorded the difference of amount on account of extending matric trained scale for the period 04.02.2008 to 31.12.2008 which comes to Rs. 65,602/-. It is further contended that the aforenoted amount shall be credited in the account of the petitioner immediately. Further vide memo no. 653 dated 04.04.2025 the amount of the leave encashment under 7^th pay revision has also been calculated and as per the available record, the difference amount came to Rs. 46,218/-, which will also be credited in the account of the petitioner.

¶25

From the counter affidavit though it appears that the admissible amount under the aforenoted heads has been calculated and undertaking has been given that the same shall be credited in the account of the petitioner, however it has not been informed to this Court whether the amount has been credited or not.

¶26

Considering the averments made in the counter affidavit, this Court deems it fit and proper to dispose off the writ petition with a hope and expectation that the amount as

¶27

Patna High Court CWJC No.3857 of 2022(8) dt.24-04-2025 3/3

¶28

disclosed in the counter affidavit must be credited in the account of the petitioner, if not credited till date, preferably within a

¶29

period of four weeks’ from today.

¶30