IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.12353 of 2011 1. Mira Prasad @ Mira Kumari W/O Sumant Prasad R/O: 236 Patliputra Colony , Patna -13 ---Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Bihar Through Chief Secretary, Govt.Of Bihar , Patna 2. The Commissioner Cum Secretary, Co-Operative Department, Bihar, Patna 3. The Registrar, Co-Operative Societies, Bihar, Patna. 4. Bihar State Co-Operative Federation Limited, Patna Represented By Its Managing Director Cum Administrator, Bihar, Patna. 5. Managing Director, Bihar State Co-Operative Federation Limited, Bihar, Patna. ---Respondents. ---------------------------------- 03 19.10.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondent- Bihar State Co-operative Federation Limited ( for short „Federation‟). Be it noted at the outset that the Federation during the relevant period remained under supersession and was administered by Administrator appointed by the Government is not under controversy. Petitioner was an employee of the said Federation. It is her case that the Federation took a decision that the relevant Rules applicable to the employees of the State Government shall also be applicable to the employees of the Federation. It is the petitioner‟s case that on 24.03.2005, the Government of Bihar, in the Department of Finance, took a policy decision to enhance the age of superannuation of its employees from 58 to 60 years. The Co- operative Department thereafter issued appropriate directions to raise the age of superannuation of the Societies/Federation accordingly. The matter remained pending. Petitioner preferred a writ petition being CWJC No. 17282 of 2009. This Court by a proceeding dated 2 17.12.2009 (Annexure-6 to the supplementary affidavit) disposed of the application by the following order:- “For the relief prayed for in this writ application petitioners are at liberty to represent before the Administrator, Bihar State Cooperative Federation Limited, Bihar, Patna, Respondent No.5, who should consider the same in accordance with law as early as possible, in any case within one month from the date of receipt of the representation of the petitioners along with a copy of this order. This writ application is, accordingly, disposed of.” Petitioner thereafter filed a representation along with the copy of the said order on 23.12.2009. The respondent Federation failed to take appropriate decision in accordance with law on her representation till 23.01.2010. Petitioner was allowed to superannuate w.e.f. 31.01.2010 on attaining 58 years of age. Subsequently the Federation, by an order contained in letter bearing no. 127 dated 17.06.2011 (Annexure-7), enhanced the age of superannuation of its employees from 58 years to 60 years. Learned counsel appearing in support of the petition submits that petitioner had been pursuing the matter and as per order dated 17.12.2009 passed in CWJC No.17282 of 2009 the authorities were required to take a decision within a month which expired on 23.01.2010, and as such, the effective date of the order of enhancing the age of superannuation, in the case of the petitioner, be treated as the last date on which the authorities of the Federation were required to take a decision. Learned counsel submits that the aforesaid date would be 23.01.2010. Reliance in this regard has been placed on an order of this Court passed in CWJC No. 2455 of 2008 (Indradeo 3 Sharma vs. The State of Bihar & Ors.) as contained in Annexure-8 to the supplementary affidavit. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the Federation. Learned counsel for the Federation, with reference to the averments made in the counter affidavit, submits that the Federation is reeling under a financial crisis. Presently there are only 07 employees serving the Federation. The situation is so worse that employees are paid salaries for 3-4 months only in a year. It is next contended that the petitioner has already received terminal benefits in the shape of Group Insurance amount, P.F. amount and she is receiving pension from EP.F. Organization. Learned counsel for the petitioner, on the other hand, takes a stand that the petitioner would be ready and willing to re- deposit the terminal benefits paid by the Federation and EPF Organization within a time frame to be fixed by the respondent in order to get the benefit of enhanced scale of pay. Leaned counsel further states that the petitioner would also be satisfied if 50% of the basic scale of the pay of the post held by her is/are paid to her for the period she had been kept out of service by making her to superannuate w.e.f. 31.01.2010 by order contained in Annexure-7. Learned counsel for the respondent takes a stand that let the matter be remanded back to the respondent Managing Director- cum-Administrator of the Federation (respondent no.4) where the petitioner will make detailed representation and the said authority be directed to consider the said representation in the light of submissions 4 made by the petitioner and taken note hereinabove as well as the order passed by this Court in CWJC No. 2455 of 2008 dated 30.01.2009 (Annexure-8 to the supplementary affidavit). Mr. Prakash, learned counsel for the petitioner states that petitioner would file a representation in this regard within a period of 03 weeks and the said respondent be directed to consider and dispose of the application within 04 weeks of its filing/presentation. Having noticed the submissions made on behalf of the parties, this Court disposes of the application by the following order:- Let the petitioner file a detailed representation within a period of 03 weeks from today along with a copy of the present order whereafter the said respondent shall consider and dispose of the same in accordance with law taking note of the submissions of the parties noticed in the present order within 04 weeks of its filing/presentation. Sym ( Kishore K. Mandal, J.)