IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LPA No.1038 of 2009 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR through the Secretary, Science and Technology Department, Government of Bihar, Patna 2. The Director, Science and Technology Department, Government of Bihar, Vishwaishwariya Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna 3. The Director, Technical Education, Science and Technology Department, Government of Bihar, Vishwaishwariya Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna 4. The Principal, Polytechnic College, Gaya 5. The Director, Bihar Institute of Technology, Sindri, District Dhanbad(Jharkhand … … Appellants Versus 1. RAMASHRAY SINGH son of late Rajendra Singh, resident of Vilalge Pachkhanda, Police Station Mashrakh, District Saran(Chapra) at present residing in Mohalla Indrapuri, Road No. 6,Quarter No. 68, Police Station Patliputra, District Patna … … Respondent Ist Set 2. The Managing Director, Bihar State Agro Industries Development Corporation, Limited, Sinha Library Road, Patna … … Respondent 2nd Set 3. The Accountant General, Bihar, Birchand Patel Marg, Patna … … Respondent 3rd Set For the appellants: Shri Mrigendra Kumar, A.C. to S.C.10 For the respondent: Shri A.B.Ojha, Adv. ( Ist set) ----------- 5. 9.2.2011 Heard learned counsel for the parties on I.A. No. 5101 of 2009 which is an application for condoning the delay in filing the appeal. In view of the grounds mentioned in this application, this interlocutory application is allowed and the delay in filing this appeal is condoned. This Letters Patent Appeal has been filed challenging the correctness of the order dated 17.12.2008 passed by the learned Single Judge in C.W.J.C.No. 150 of 2006 by 2 which the writ petition was allowed. After having heard learned counsel for the appellants and respondent no.1, we are in complete agreement with the learned Single Judge when the learned Judge was holding, while referring to another Division decision of this Court in Kamal Bansh Narayan Singh Vs. The State of Bihar & ors ( L.P.A. No. 154 of 2004) as also the decisions of the Apex Court in Kapila Hingorani Vs. The State of Bihar reported in (2003) 6 SCC 1 and A.I.R. 2005 SC 980 that the services rendered by the respondent no.1 in the Bihar State Small Industries Corporation Ltd, a limb which are the extended limbs of public services under the State of Bihar, the total service rendered by the respondent no-1 be considered for computing pensionary benefits. We find no merit in this appeal. It is, accordingly, dismissed. However, if pensionary benefits have not been paid to respondent Ramashray Singh, it must be paid to him without further loss of time and, preferably, within two months of this order, else, the State shall have to incur statutory interest on the retiral dues. Kanth ( T. Meena Kumari, J.) ( Dharnidhar Jha, J.)