IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LPA No.1449 of 2010 (Arising out of CWJC No. 9775 of 2008) 1. Ragho Yadav, S/O Late Ramcharan Yadav, R/O Vill.- Chhotaki Rajawa, P.O.- Hasanpur Sugar Mill, P.S.- Hasanpur, Distt.- Samastipur …Appellant Versus 1. The State of Bihar 2. The Secretary Grih Arakchhi Bibhag, Bihar, Patna 3. The District Magistrate, Samastipur at Samastipur 4. The Superintendent of Police, Samastipur 5. The Circle Officer, Hasanpur Circle, Sub-Division Rosera, Distt.- Samastipur…………………………………………….Respondents ----------- 3. 25.11.2011 Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the State. The Writ Court has noted that the first writ petition preferred by the appellant bearing C.W.J.C. No. 5469/2005 was dismissed and relief was denied to the appellant by holding that he was not entitled to pension and other retiral benefits by counting past service rendered in the capacity of Chaukidar under the Bihar Chaukidari Manual. There is no dispute that the erstwhile Chaukidar covered by the Manual became a Government servant with effect from 01.01.1990. Thereafter, as per law applicable to the government servant at the relevant time as a Class-IV employee. The appellant superannuated on 31.5.1998 on attaining 58 years of age. Against the dismissal of his first writ petition, the appellant had preferred L.P.A. No. 294 of 2008 which was withdrawn on 22nd April, 2008 by order contained in Annexure-3 to the present writ petition. That order shows that appellant withdrew 2 the appeal with liberty that he could challenge the order by which he was superannuated from service on attaining the age of 58 years on 31.5.1998. The Writ Court appears to have fallen in error in observing that the said L.P.A. was withdrawn without any liberty. Pursuant to the liberty granted at the time of withdrawal of the L.P.A. No. 294 of 2008, the present writ petition was filed on 08.07.2008 seeking a declaration that petitioner was superannuated illegally and premature at the age of 58 years and that he is entitled to superannuate on reaching age of 60 years. In order to support the claim that appellant is entitled to continue in service till 60 years, learned counsel for the appellant has placed reliance upon Rule 34- A of Bihar Chaukidari Manual which was added in 1982 to prescribe the minimum and maximum age upto which erstwhile Chaukidars who were not government servant and were hence covered by Bihar Manual could be in service. No doubt under Rule 34-A, the age of superannuation has been mentioned as 60 years but we have no hesitation in holding that the provisions of Chaukidari Maduanl ceased to apply to such Chaukidars who became government servant with effect from 01.01.1990 and thereafter, became amenable to the rules and regulations relating to government servant under which in 1998 the appellant was rightly superannuated at the age of 58 years. Such as stand taken in the counter affidavit filed in the writ proceeding appears to be quite in 3 order and we find no good ground to declare that the appellant was wrongly superannuated at the age of 58 years and that he should be treated to continue in service till 31.5.2000. For those in government service under the State of Bihar, the age of superannuation was extended from 58 years to 60 years in the year 2005. We find no merit in this appeal. It is, accordingly, dismissed. It goes without saying that if any dues of the appellant to which he was entitled on account of superannuation at the age of 58 years has remain unpaid then the same shall be paid to him without any delay, preferably within three months of filing a representation. Mkc/ (Shiva Kirti Singh, J.) (Shivaji Pandey, J.)