IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.15394 of 2001 NANDJEE SINGH, SON OF LATE SRI YUGESHWAR SINGH, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE AND P.O.- BAG MAJHAUWAN, POLICE STATION- KOILWAR, DISTRICT- BHOJPUR :--- PETITIONER . Versus 1. THE BIHAR STATE CO-OPERATIVE LAND DEVELOPMENT BANK THROUGH ITS ADMINISTRATOR, BUDHA MARG, PATNA. 2. THE ADMINISTRATOR, BIHAR STATE CO-OPERATIVE LAND DEVELOPMENT BANK, BUDH MARG, PATNA. 3. THE DEPUTY MANAGING DIRECTOR (ADMINISTRATION), BIHAR STATE CO-OPERATIVE DEVELOPMENT BANK, 4. BUDH MARG, PATNA:--- RESPONDENTS. ----------- FOR THE PETITIONER : MR. SANJAY KUMAR, ADVOCATE. FOR THE BANK : MR. RAJESH PD. CHOUDHARY, ADVOCATE. ====== 8. 13.09.2010. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the Bihar State Co-operative Land Development Bank (hereinafter referred to as the “Bank”). 2. Petitioner served as a Field Officer in one of the Branches of the Bank. He is aggrieved by the office order bearing Memo No. 5321dated 12.7.2000 issued by the Deputy Managing Director, (Administration) under orders of the Administrator directing compulsory retirement of the petitioner in terms of the provisions contained in Rule 74(b)(ii) of the Bihar Service Code with effect from 15.7.2000. 3. Counsel for the petitioner assailed the said order on the ground that neither the Establishment Committee of the Bank nor its Administrator ever passed any order to compulsory retire him. He further submitted that the averments - 2 - made in paragraph-10 of the counter affidavit that on account of poor loan collection petitioner was directed to compulsory retire is wholly misconceived as no such order was ever passed by any of the competent authorities in the Bank. To verify the aforesaid contention this Court allowed the counsel for the Bank to produce the order of the Establishment Committee or the Administrator of the Bank by which it was directed to compulsory retire the petitioner. 4. Counsel for the Bank has not been able to produce such order inspite of due indulgence granted to him. In the circumstances, I have no option but to quash the impugned order dated 12.7.2000, Annexure-6, which is, accordingly, quashed with direction to pay the petitioner the entire arrears of salary for the period between 16.7.2000 till 31st January, 2004, the date on which he attained his age of superannuation, as early as possible, in any case within a period of three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order before the competent authority of the Bank. It goes without saying that while calculating the terminal benefits of the petitioner the authorities of the Bank would take into account - 3 - the service rendered by the petitioner until 31.1.2004. 5. The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of. P.K.P. (V.N.Sinha,J.)