IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.351 of 2002 DR.GIRISH DEO NARAYAN SINGH, S/O LATE LAGAN DEO SINGH, R/O ‘SAMEER SADAN’, MITRA COMPOUND, BORING ROAD, PATNA, DISTRICT-PATNA. ………………PETITIONER. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE CHIEF SECRETARY, OLD SECRETARIAT, PATNA. 2. THE COMMISSIONER-CUM-SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, FAMILY WELFARE AND MEDICAL EDUCATION, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA. 3. THE DIRECTOR-IN-CHIEF, HEALTH SERVICES, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, FAMILY WELFARE AND MEDICAL EDUCATION, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA. 4. THE CHIEF SURGEON-CUM-CHIEF MEDICAL OFFICER, BHOJPUR AT ARA. ………………RESPONDENTS. ----------- 6 05.04.2010 When the case was taken up last on 7.1.2010, learned counsel for the petitioner has taken stand that case of the petitioner for grant of senior selection grade scale was not considered while his junior one Dr. Madan Mohan Prasad Singh was granted the said scale with effect from 1.4.1990. The learned counsel for the State was accordingly directed to file a supplementary counter affidavit. A supplementary counter affidavit has been filed in which it has been stated that the said Dr. Madan Mohan Prasad Singh was not junior to the petitioner in the gradation list rather he was much above him. It has been categorically stated in the supplementary counter affidavit that no one 2 junior to the petitioner has been granted the said scale. Today, learned counsel for the petitioner refers to Annexure-B to the main counter affidavit and submits that the petitioner has been granted promotion in the scale by said notification dated 20.10.2008 after his superannuation in which he has been granted notional fixation of pay scale in the revised scale with effect from 1.1.1996 and has been allowed the monetary benefits of the same with effect from 1.4.1997. Therefore, on account of delay he is entitled to interest on the said amount. He also submits that in view of this grant of revised pay scale to the petitioner, petitioner is entitled for re-fixation of his pensionary benefits etc. Apparently, in view of the supplementary counter affidavit, learned counsel for the petitioner has changed his stand. By notification, as contained in Annexure-B, large number of persons have been allowed the revised pay scale from the date the revision become effective. However, there is no statement in the counter affidavit that the pensionary benefits 3 of the petitioner have been revised and difference of amount has been paid to him. In the circumstances, rejecting the claim of the petitioner for interest on the said amount, this Court directs the respondents to revise the pensionary benefits of the petitioner in accordance with law in view of the grant of revised pay scale to him with effect from 1.4.1997, if not already done, and pay the difference of the amount to the petitioner, preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order, if not already paid. The writ application is accordingly disposed of with the aforesaid observations and directions. Arvind/ (J. N. Singh, J.)