IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LPA No.200 of 2009 1.MRIDUL KUMAR SINHA. 2.SANJAY SINHA. 3.SANJEEV SINHA. ALL SONS OF LATE SHAILESH CHANDRA SINHA, JAMAL ROAD, PATNA-800001 AT PRESENT RESIDING AT UMA ASHTHALI, MANDAL COMPOUND, BORING ROAD, PATNA-1. ......PETITIONER-APPELLANT. Versus 1.THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO GOVT. BIHAR, VIKAS BHAWAN, PATNA-800001. 2.THE CHAIRMAN, FINANCE (BUREAU OF PUBLIC ENTERPRISES) DEPARTMENT, BIHAR, OLD SECRETARIAT, PATNA-800001. 3.THE FINANCE COMMISSIONER, GOVT. OF BIHAR OLD SECRETARIAT, PATNA. 4.THE DIRECTOR OF INDUSTRIES, DIRECTORATE OF INDUSTRIES, VIKAS BHAWAN, PATNA. 5.THE ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR OF INDUSTRIES BIHAR VIKAS BHAWAN, PATNA. 6.THE DEPUTY SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIES, VIKAS BHAWAN, PATNA. 7.THE ACCOUNTANT GENERLA BIHAR, PATNA. 8.THE PATNA INDUSTRIAL AREA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY THROUGH ITS CHAIRMAN, UDYOG BHAWAN, EAST GANDHI MAIDAN, PATNA-800004. 9.THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, PATNA INDUSTRIAL AREA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, UDYOG BHAWAN, EAST GANDHI MAIDAN, PATNA- 800004. 10.THE SECRETARY, PATNA INDUSTRIAL AREA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, UDYOG BHAWAN, EAST GANDHI MAIDAN, PATNA-4. ......RESPONDENTS-RESPONDENTS. ----------- 08/ 02.12.2010 Having heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the respondents, this Court is of the considered opinion that there is no error in the order of the learned Single Judge allowing the writ petition of the appellant-writ petitioner by giving a direction in the following terms:- 2 “The writ application of the petitioner is allowed, Annexure-1 is quashed and the respondent State authorities are directed that in light of Hem Chandra Jha’s decision, the respondents would be duty bound to treat 10 years of service rendered by the petitioner to be enough for the purposes of grant of pension by the State. They are directed to take steps for working out the pension of the petitioner and finalise the same preferably within a period of three months from the date of communication/production of a copy of this order”. As a matter of fact, in the light of the fact that this writ application was allowed by learned Single Judge, we had put this question to Mr. Naresh Chandra Verma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of appellant- writ petitioner as to how, this appeal will be maintainable. He has, however, taken a plea that the deceased employee was in fact, a Government Servant who was in employment of the Industries Department and therefore, when his services were handed over 3 to Bihar Industrial Area Development Authority and had continued in service till the date of his retirement i.e 31.08.1990, when he had retired from his service, he would be deemed to be a Government Servant entitled for full pension in terms of the Bihar Pension Rules but the learned Single Judge did not hold him entitled for this period of service. In our considered opinion, the prayer of the petitioner in the writ application being very much confined and reading as follows:- “That this is an application praying for issuance of a writ in the nature of a writ of certiorari for quashing the order as contained in letter no. 1510 dated 06.03.97 issued by the Additional Director of Industries, Govt. of Bihar, Patna as the same being illegal and arbitrary besides its being against the statutory provisions provided in the Bihar Service Code, Bihar pension Rules and against the various orders passed by this Hon’ble Court on the subject. And in the result commanding upon the respondents to issue necessary sanction order 4 for payment of pension with statutory interest to the petitioner for the service rendered by him under the State Govt. as per provisions in Rule 145 of the Bihar Pension Rules”. would leave nothing for speculation that the writ petitioner had only claimed pension for the period of service rendered by him under the State Government only. This in fact, becomes further clear from the impugned order which was passed by the Authority on 06.03.1997, which in fact, was also made subject matter of the writ application. The impugned order dated 06.03.1997 for the shake of clarity is also quoted herein below. Þfcgkj ljdkj mn~;ksx funs”kky; i=kad 1510 iVuk fnukad 6-3-1997 la0la0-1@isa'ku 05@95 izs"kd] Jh th0ih0 flag] vij mn~;ksx funs”kd lsok esa lfpo iVuk vkSn~;kSfxd {ks= fodkl izkf/kdkj] mn~;ksx Hkou] iwoZ xk¡/kh eSnku] iVuk 800004 egk”k;] mi;qZDr fo’k;d vki vius i=kad 578 LFkk0 fnukad 25@4@95 dk lej.k djuk pkgsaxsA bl Øe esa dguk gS fd Jh “kSys”kpUnz flUgk] lsok fuo`r duh; rduhdh izcU/kd ds }kjk fnukad 4@2@67 ls 14@6@78 rd ljdkj ds v/khu fcrkbZ xbZ lsok ds fy;s foRr foHkkx ds ijke”kZ ds vkyksd esa isa”ku vuqekU; ugha gSA D;ksafd foRr foHkkx ds ifji= la0 3014 fnukad 31@7@80 dh dafMdk 18 ds vuqlkj vLFkk;h vkSj LFkk;h ljdkjh lsodksa ds ekeys esa isa”ku dh vuqekU;rk ds fy;s 10 o’kksZ dh U;qure lsok fu/kkZfjr dh xbZ gSA mDr ifji= dh dafMdk 20 esa mfYyf[kr gS fd ;g vkns”k frfFk 31@3@80 dks ;k 5 mlds ckn lsok fuo`r gksus okys ljdkjh lsodksa ds fy;s ykxw gksxkA bl frfFk ds iwoZ isa”ku dh vuqekU;rk ds fy;s vLFkk;h ljdkjh lsod ds fy;s 15 o’kZ vkSj LFkk;h ljdkjh lsod ds fy;s 10 o’kksZ dh U;wure lsok fu/kkZfjr FkhA Jh flUgk fnukad 14@6@78 rd ljdkjh lsok esa jgsA vr,o buds ekeys esa fnukad 31@3@80 ds iwoZ dk izko/kku ykxw gksxkA Jh flUgk jkT; ljdkj ds v/khu ,d vLFkk;h deZpkjh FksA vr,o isa”ku dh vuqekU;rkds fy;s mudh U;wure lsok 15 o’kksZ dh gksuh pkfg;s Fkh ij os fnukad 4-2-67 ls 14-6-78 rd 11 o’kZ 44 eghuk vkSj 10 fnu dh lsok vfiZr fd;sA vr,o Jh flUgk dks isa”ku vuqekU; ugha gksrk gSA vr% vkids i=kad 678 Lfkk0 fnukad 25-4-95 }kjk izkIr Jh flUgk dh lsok iqLr ¼pkj izfr;ksa esa½ ,oa isa”kizi= ewy :i esa vkidks okil fd;k tk jgk gSA vuqyXud %& mijksDr fo”oklHkktu g0@& vij mn~;ksx funs”kdÞ From the reading of the impugned order dated 06.03.1997 read with the prayer portion in the writ application, it would be more than clear that as a matter of fact the lis in the writ application was confined only for the period, the writ petitioner had rendered his service in the Industries Department before his services were handed over to Bihar Industrial Area Development Authority. Normally, having held so, we were inclined to dismiss the appeal as not maintainable being beyond the scope of the writ application but then Mr. Verma has submitted that in some other cases, others are being given the benefit of pension by treating the entire service rendered in the Government. 6 In our opinion, such examples may only give the petitioners a fresh cause of action for which they may pursue remedy before the appropriate authority by filing a representation. We must however, make it clear that we have expressed no opinion on this part of the submission of the learned counsel for the appellant-writ petitioner and therefore, it would be open to the respondent Authorities to take their independent decision strictly in accordance with law with reference to the observations made in the proceedings by this Court. With the aforementioned observation and direction, this application is disposed of. Ranjan (T.Meena Kumari,J) (Mihir Kumar Jha,J)