IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.4 of 2010 1. RAMA RANI BAKSHI D/O LATE AMAR NATH BAKSHI R/O 'SHAKUN VILLA', MAURYA VIHAR COLONY, CHANAKYA PATH, KUMHARAR, PATNA P.S. AGAMKUAN, DISTT.- PATNA Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR, THROUGH THE FINANCE COMMISSIONER, GOVT. OF BIHAR, HAVING ITS OFFICE AT OLD SECRETARIAT COMPOUND, P.S.- SACHIVALAYA, DISTT.- PATNA 2. THE SECRETARY, COOPERATIVE DEPARTMENT, GOVT. OF BIHAR, HAVING ITS OFFICE AT VIKAS BHAVAN, P.S. SACHIVALAYA, DISTT.- PATNA 3. THE CHAIRMAN, BIHAR STATE WARE HOUSING CORPORATION, HAVING ITS OFFICE AT B/2, FIRST FLOOR, MAURYA LOK, P.S.- KOTWALI, DISTT.- PATNA 4. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, BIHAR STATE WARE HOUSING CORPORATION, HAVING ITS OFFICE AT B/2, FIRST FLOOR, MAURYA LOK, P.S. KOTWALI, DISTT.- PATNA For the petitioner :Mr.Rama Kant Pd. Singh, Advocate For the Respondent nos. 1 & 2: Mr. Ritesh Kumar, Advocate AC to AAG-I For the Respondent nos. 3 & 4: Mr. Kunal Tiwary, Advocate 02/ 01.02.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, counsel for the Bihar Stare Ware Housing Corporation (hereinafter referred as the Corporation) and the counsel for the State. 2. Petitioner while serving as Public Relation Officer in the Corporation, was destined to superannuate with effect from 31.12.2007. She has filed this writ application for a direction to the Corporation to grant her the benefit of the extended retirement age of 60 years. Such request is being refuted by the Corporation with reference to the provisions contained in Rule 13 of the Staff Regulations formulated by the Corporation. 3. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that in the light of the resolution of the State Government in the Finance Department, bearing No. 1500 dated 24.3.2005 and the office order of the Corporation, bearing No. 91 dated 30.3.2005, Annexure-4, Corporation employees who superannuated after 30.3.2005 were - 2 - allowed the benefit of the extended age of retirement. In this connection, reliance has been placed over a list of the employees of the Corporation contained in Annexure-13, who were allowed the benefit of the extended age. Further reliance is placed over order contained in Annexure- 13/1, in terms whereof other employees were allowed the benefit of the extended age by the Corporation. 4. Counsel for the Corporation refuted the prayer of the petitioner and submitted that petitioner was retired from the service of the Corporation on 30.4.2008, vide Annexure-16 as the State Government did not accord approval for amending Rule 13 of the Staff Regulation. He further referred to the judgment of the Division Bench dated 8.1.2010, passed in L.P.A. No. 812 of 2009, Annexure-B to the counter affidavit whereunder the Division Bench observed in paragraph 17 that the case of those who retired in between May, 2008 to 31st October, 2008 be considered for grant of notional benefit in the light of the approval of the State Government to extend the age of superannuation of the employees of the Corporation contained in letter dated 31.10.2008, Annexure-18. 5. Petitioner was made to retire on 30.4.2008 afternoon. In the circumstances, her case is also required to be considered for grant of notional benefit in the light of the observation/ direction of the Division Bench and, accordingly, I dispose of the writ application with direction to grant her also the same benefit, which is to be allowed to others in the light of the observation of the Division Bench contained in paragraph 17 of the judgment, Annexure-B to the counter affidavit. - 3 - 6. Necessary orders in the light of this order and the order of the Division Bench dated 8.1.2010, passed in L.P.A. No. 812 of 2009 be passed by the State Government, as early as possible, in any case within two months from the date of receipt/ production of a copy of this order. 7. The writ application is, accordingly, disposed of. Arjun/ (V.N. Sinha, J.)