IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.14024 of 2003 SIDHESHWAR PRASAD SINGH . Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS . ----------- 3 02.11.2010 Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State, while this court is of the considered view that the concerted attempt on the part of the petitioner to claim payment of salary of the Graduate Trained scale of pay from 15.02.1982 to February 1988 must be rejected for the simple reason that his order of promotion in the Graduate Trained scale of pay was notified by the competent authority only on 19th July, 1990 making it absolutely clear that the petitioner would be entitled for such grant of B.Ed. trained scale of pay from February 1988, The assumption of the petitioner is that since he was holding the qualification of B.Ed. Trained scale of pay from the date of his appointment and therefore he became automatically entitled for grant of B.Ed.. trained scale from the date of his appointment has to be noted for its being rejected. The grant of B.Ed. trained scale of pay to any teacher is by way of promotion and can only be given in terms of the eligibility and seniority. Admittedly the initial appointment of the petitioner was made on the post of matric trained teacher and 2 after considering his seniority and complete the prescribed length of Kalawadhi he was considered and given such promotion in the graduate trained scale of pay on 19-7-1990 with effect from February, 1988 vide Annexure-3 to the writ petition. The petitioner in fact never chose to question the correctness of Annexure-3, the order dated 19th July, 1990 giving him such promotion on the post of Graduate Trained in his entire active service till the year 2001 and for the first time he had raised such issue by filing this writ application on 16.02.2003. The petitioner cannot be allowed to do so in the garb of claiming revision of his pay scale by seeking to reopen his order of promotion dated 9-7-1990 and to that extent the writ petition suffers from unexplained delay and laches of more than thirteen years. Thus, the claim of the petitioner for fixation of his pay in the Graduate Trained pay from February 1982 must be and is hereby rejected. The next question would be the adminisiblity of the retirement benefit of the petitioner. The respondent State of Jharkhand has clearly asserted that the petitioner was not only paid his full pay and emoluments in the pay scale of Graduate Trained teacher from February 1988 onwards till the date of his retirement, but even his retirement benefit was paid on the last pay drawn in the B.Ed. trained scale. Counsel for the petitioner, however, has seriously contested this 3 statement in paragraph no.15 of the counter affidavit by filing a rejoinder affidavit in which it has been claimed by the petitioner in paragraph no.8, that the petitioner’s retirement benefit including monthly pension was fixed in the matric trained scale of pay and to that extent learned counsel for the petitioner relies on Annexure-4 from the authorization slip issued by the accountant general dated 13.2.2001 to show that the last pay drawn as rupees 7425/- is actually the entitlement of the petitioner in the matric trained scale. He has further stated that the fixation of Rs.2375/- per month as monthly pension is again only in the matric trained scale of pay and not in the Graduate Trained scale of pay. Unfortunately all these are matters of detail and when the petitioner has also not produced the last pay slip in terms of which he got his Graduate Trained scale of pay, despite admitting the fact that he had been paid salary of the post of B.Ed. trained pay scale from February 1988 till the date of his retirement on 31.1.2000, the issue can not be decided for want of authentic materials on record.. In that view of the matter, the competent authority who has fixed the monthly pension of the petitioner and the office of Accountant General will look into this aspect and if it is found that the petitioner’s retirement benefit including the monthly pension has been paid is in the matric trained 4 scale despite the petitioner having been granted graduate trained scale and also paid his salary from February 1988 till January 2001 in the B.Ed. trained scale of pay, and order will be issued for revising monthly pension and also other retiral benefit by taking into account the last pay drawn by the petitioner in the B.Ed. trained scale. If, on the other hand, it is found that the petitioner has already been paid his retirement benefit and is also being paid monthly pension taking into account the salary of the petitioner of the post of Graduate Trained scale of pay, there would be no need not go into this fresh exercise and the competent authority will simply inform the petitioner that he has already been given the retirement benefit and monthly pension on the basis of graduate pay scale. This exercise however must be completed by the respondents within a period of six months from the date of receipt / production of a copy of this order. With the aforementioned observation and direction this writ petition is disposed of. PN ( Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)