IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Letters Patent Appeal No.716 of 2011 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 9111 of 2005 ====================================================== 1. The State of Bihar through the Secretary, Minor Irrigation, Vikash Bhawan, New Secretariat, Patna 2. The Project Coordinator (Tube-Well Project), Minor Irrigation, Vishweshwariya Bhavan, Patna 3. The Secretary-cum-Commissioner, Finance, Old Secretariat, Patna 4. The Director General, Provident Fund, Pant Bhavan, Patna .... .... Appellant/s Versus 1. Brahamanand Upadhyaya son of Late Deo Prasad Upadhyay at present resident of Near Mahanth School, Mainpura, P.O. GPO, Patna District Patna, permanent resident village- Andap, PS & Distt. Patna 2. The Accountant General, Bihar, Patna having his office at Birchand Patel Patna, Patna .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant/s : Mr. Chakradhari Sharan Singh, AAG 6 For the Respondent/s : Mr Amar Nath Singh, Advocate ====================================================== 3 09-08-2011 Heard the parties in respect of limitation petition (IA No.3215 of 2011). For the reasons mentioned in the said application, the delay of about one year in preferring this appeal is condoned. The IA stands allowed. Heard the parties on merits also. The writ petitioner was appointed as a Correspondence Clerk in the year 1961. In 1972, he was promoted to the post of Accounts Clerk- cum- Cashier and again he was promoted to the next higher post of Accountant with effect from Patna High Court LPA No.716 of 2011 (3) dt.09-08-2011 2 13.2.1975. On the said post, he superannuated on 30.4.1994. There was some delay in submission of papers by the writ petitioner for his final pension. While scrutinizing the service book of the writ petitioner for sanctioning pension on regular basis, it was found that there was no entry to show that he had passed the departmental examination for Hindi noting and drafting which was necessary for getting promotion. On that fact alone, the authorities decided to fix his pension by ignoring increments earned by him. There is no dispute that the only issue involved in this appeal is whether authorities can hold that the writ petitioner did not pass the departmental examination in question. The controversy has arisen after a long period because according to the writ petitioner he had passed the said examination sometime in the year 1963 or 1964. No doubt, there is no document available with the writ petitioner to support the said claim but the fact that he was granted two promotions and timely increments goes to support his stand whereas the only material relied upon by the State is absence of entry in the service book and the circumstance that the regular pension papers were submitted after a delay. The Writ Court, in our view, has taken the correct view because there is a presumption of regularity and correctness Patna High Court LPA No.716 of 2011 (3) dt.09-08-2011 3 of official acts. The promotions granted to the writ petitioner long back support his stand that he had passed the departmental examination. That presumption could have been displaced by adducing any cogent evidence but it is an admitted fact that the relevant records of Rajbhasha Department which conducted the Hindi noting and drafting examination is not available and the personal service file of the writ petitioner is also not available on account of destruction of some records during the floods of 1975. In the facts and circumstances of the case, only on the basis of suspicion the writ petitioner should not have been deprived of his increments. We find no merit in this appeal, it is accordingly dismissed. sk (Shiva Kirti Singh, J) (Shivaji Pandey, J)