IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.5833 of 2011 Shyam Kishore Pandey Ex-Principal Grade-1 (Retired), Kendriya Vidyalaya No. 2 ASC (North) Paharpur, Gaya son of Late Ramji Pandey, Resident of Mohalla Mainpura (West), P.O. Danapur Cantt. P.S.Danapur, District, Patna… Petitioner. Versus 1.The Union Of India through the Chairman, Kendraya Vidyalaya Sangathan, Head Quarter, New Delhi cum the Minister, Human Resources Development (Department of Education) New Delhi. 2.The Vice-Chairman, Kendraya Vidyalaya Sangathan, Head Quarter, New Delhi cum the Minister, Human Resources Development (Department of Education) New Delhi. 3.The Commissioner, Kendraya Vidyalaya Sangathan, Head Quarter, New Delhi 18, Institutional Area, Shaheed Jeet Singh Marg, New Delhi. 4.The Deputy Commissioner (Finance), Kendraya Vidyalaya Sangathan, Head Quarter, New Delhi 18, Institutional Area, Shaheed Jeet Singh Marg, New Delhi. 5.The Deputy Commissioner (Personnel), Kendraya Vidyalaya Sangathan, Head Quarter, New Delhi 18, Institutional Area, Shaheed Jeet Singh Marg, New Delhi. 6.The Assistant Commissioner, Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan (Regional Office), Patna. 7.The Senior Audit and Accounts Officer, Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan 18, Institutional Area, Shaheed Jeet Singh Marg, New Delhi. 8.The Administrative Officer, Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan(Regional Office) Patna. 9.The Principal Kendriya Vidyalaya No.-2 (ASC) Paharpur, Gaya…Respondents. ----------- For the petitioner : Sri Pradeep Kumar, Adv. For the Respondents : Mr. G.K.Agrawal, Adv. Mr. K.Ramesh, Adv. 2. 06.09.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the 2 learned counsel for the respondents. After hearing the parties, we find that the order passed in O.A.No. 805 of 2004, contained in Annexure-2 dated 3rd June 205 attained finality in respect of grant of pensionary benefit to the petitioner along with 6 per cent interest. A subsequent disciplinary proceeding initiated in October 205 and ended in October 2008 with displeasure conveyed by the Government cannot take away the legal force of Annexure-2 and will not entitle the petitioner to reagitate for higher interest over pensionary benefits. In our view the learned Tribunal has rightly held that subsequent O.A. filed by the petitioner is hit by principle of Res-judicata. The writ petition is found to be without any merits. It is dismissed accordingly. Jay/ (Shiva Kirti Singh,J) (Shivaji Pandey, J)