IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.14279 of 2002 SATCHIDANAND SAHAY SON OF ADITYANAND SAHAY, EX- CONDUCTOR, N.F. RAILWAYS, KATIHAR, RESIDENT OF MOHALLA-LOHIANAGAR BARAMASIA, P.O. AND DISTRICT KATIHAR. …APPLICANT--PETITIONER Versus 1. THE UNION OF INDIA THROUGH THE SECRETARY, MINISTRRY OF RAILWAYS, NEW DELHI. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF ESTABLISHMENT, RAILWAY BOARD, RAIL BHAWAN, NEW DELHI. 3. THE GENERAL MANAGER, N.F. RAILWAY, MALIGAON, GAUHATI. 4. THE CHIEF PERSONNEL OFFICER, N.F. RAILWAYS, MALIGAON, GAUHATI. 5. THE DIVISIONAL RAILWAY MANAGER, N.F. RAILWAYS, KATIHAR. 6. THE DIVISIONAL SUPERINTENDENT (P), KATIHAR. 7. THE SECRETARY, BIHAR VIDHAN SABHA SACHIVALAY, PATNA. 8. THE CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL THROUGH ITS REGISTRAR, CAT, PATNA BENCH, PATNA. …RESPONDENTS…RESPONDENTS ----------- 04. 11.05.2010 None appears on behalf of the petitioner. Heard Mr. Bhupendra Narain Yadav for respondent nos.1 to 6. This writ petition is directed against the order dated 6.12.2001, passed by the learned Central Administrative Tribunal, Patna Bench, in O.A.No.578/1996 and M.A. No.62/1997, praying for the following reliefs: “The applicant has sought computation of his earlier service rendered in Vidhan Sabha for a total period of 7 years 3 months and 10 days. The applicant has also sought for pay protection on account of two promotions accorded to him by Bihar Vidhan Sabha and seniority from the date of joining, i.e., 18.5.1966. The applicant has also sought senior scale of Rs.2000-3200. The applicant has further sought refund of Rs.7000 deducted from the DCRG and also to allow restoration of post retirement of family passes with immediate effect and had sought interest at the rate of 18%.” - 2 - We have perused the materials on record and considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties. The petitioner’s counsel did not appear before the Tribunal, nor before us. It appears that part of the reliefs prayed for is against Bihar Vidhan Sabha and is, therefore, beyond the jurisdiction of the learned Tribunal. In that view of the matter, the writ petition is disposed of with the observation that the petitioner may pursue his remedies for proportionate pension from State of Bihar. The remaining claims have been rightly rejected by the Tribunal. We do not find any ground for interference with the impugned order. It is accordingly dismissed. hr ( S. K. Katriar ) ( Kishore K. Mandal )