IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.15799 of 2008 N.K.BHATTACHARYA Versus THE UNION OF INDIA & ORS ----------- For the petitioner: Mr. S.K.Bariar, Advocate For the respondents : None --- P R E S E N T Hon'ble the Chief Justice And Hon'ble Mr. Justice Kishore K. Mandal --- Dated, the 23rd October, 2008 We heard the counsel for the petitioner. 2. The tribunal considered the matter thus: “Neither the applicant nor the respondents have brought on record the Scheme relating to grant of special pay of Rs. 35, later enhance to Rs. 70. If this special pay was wrongly granted to Shri Rajiv Bhushan, the solution is to withdraw the same from him and not to grant special pay to all his seniors. This grievance is also not raised for long. The revised proposal for sanctioning this allowance is submitted in 1998 [Annexure-A/4]. It asks for giving benefits to 22 more people in addition to two from before. They are at serial 7, and serial 9 to 29 of Annexure – A/3. The name of applicant is at serial 15. The first part of Annexure – A/3 shows that it is available for six persons only. Persons senior to him are available to him on that date. Unless their claims were rejected, the case of applicant could not have been considered. This aspect has not been considered. The applicant has retired from service. But some of the persons who may have been granted special pay may still be in service. The respondent no.3 may look into this matter and take action in view of what has been discussed above. Even the incorrect fixation of pension can be revised after following the rules and within the time frame.” 2 3. We find ourselves in agreement with the view of the tribunal. 4. The counsel then submits that the tribunal was not justified in awarding cost. 5. The discretion exercised by the tribunal in imposing cost cannot be said to suffer from any legal error. 6. Writ petition is dismissed in limine. R. M. Lodha, CJ. Kishore K. Mandal, J. Neyaz/-