IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.11566 of 2005 DR.PARASHURAM SINGH Versus THE VEER KUER SINGH UNIVERSITY & ORS. ----------- 07/ 30.04.2010 Mr. A.B. Ojha for the petitioner, Mr. A.B. Sinha for the University and Mr. Ravi Verma, assisting counsel to G.P. 15 for the State are present. Indisputably all admissible post retiral and other benefits as found admissible to the petitioner by the University has since been paid to the petitioner during the pendency of the proceedings except his claim for medical allowance of Rs. 100/- to be paid along with the pension amount, 50 per cent D.A. amount merged with the pension and 55 per cent arrears of U.G.C. amount which have yet remained pending for disbursal at the level of the University. Learned counsel for the petitioner in addition to the aforesaid claims also submits that the petitioner having been paid his post retiral benefits with considerable delay is entitled to statutory interest on the belated payments. A rejoinder has been filed on behalf of the petitioner today in response to the counter affidavit of the University and learned counsel for the petitioner in support of his contention for merger of 50 per cent dearness allowance in the basic pension and payment thereof, relies upon a Division Bench order of this Court passed in L.P.A. No. 434 of 2008 2 disposed of on 23.07.2008. That was a case relatable to the Tilaka Manjhi Bhagalpur University and the Division Bench upon consideration of the relevant provisions of the Bihar Universities Act and the Statute framed thereunder was pleased to dispose of the appeal in the following directions:- “We, accordingly, dispose of the appeal by the following order: (i) The appellant is entitled to merger of 50% of Dearness Relief in his basic pension with effect from 1st January, 2005. (ii) The respondent nos. 1 to 4 are directed to compute the petitioner’s pension with effect from 1st January, 2005 accordingly and pay him arrears of pension within six weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this order and continue to pay him pension in future accordingly.” Learned counsel thus submits that the Veer Kuer Singh University also being governed under the similar provisions, the employees of the said University are also entitled to the benefit flowing from the said order. Mr. Ohja further submits that the amount of Rs. 100/- as medical allowance on pension amount has since been raised to Rs. 200/- per month and is being paid in the other Universities except Veer Kuer Singh University and the petitioner is entitled for payment of the same. It is also contended that the balance 55 per cent of the U.G.C. arrears have not been paid by the University. 3 Having regard to the statements aforesaid, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the Registrar, Veer Kuer Singh University to dispose of the claim of the petitioner for 50 per cent merger of the dearness allowance in the light of the Division Bench order of this Court passed in L.P.A. No. 434 of 2008 placed at Annexure-4 of the rejoinder and make payment of the consequential benefits arising therefrom within a period of three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. Within the same time, the Registrar would also examine the claim of the petitioner in relation to the medical allowance of Rs. 100/- per month included in the pension amount and if the said claim is found admissible as per the Statutes/Rules governing the University then the said amount should also be paid to the petitioner within the said period. Learned counsel for the University informs the Court that certain amount for payment of the U.G.C. has since been released by the State Government and which in proportionate manner would be distributed amongst the teachers of the respondent-University and the petitioner would also be paid the proportionate amount of his balance U.G.C. arrears following the said exercise. The only issue which thus remains is about interest. The petitioner would raise the claim for interest in terms of the Statute/Circular of the University governing interest on belated payment of retiral benefits and if the claim of the 4 petitioner is found admissible the same should be paid to him within the period aforesaid. Needless to add that any of the claim as taken note of by this Court and raised by the petitioner in his representation, not found admissible, should be disposed of by a reasoned order. S.Sb/- (Jyoti Saran, J.)