IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.2351 of 1997 BISHWADEO NARAIN SINGH, S/O LATE HARIBALLABH NARAIN SINGH, R/O B/27, SHRIKRISHANAPUR, P.S SHIRKRISHANAPURI, DISTRICT PATNA. ...........PETITIONER. Versus 1.THE STATE OF BIHAR. 2.SECERETARY, DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND ADMINISTRATIVE REFORMS, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, OLD SECRETARIATE, PATNA. 3.SECRETARY, FINANCE, BIHAR, PATNA, OLD SECRETARIATE, PATNA. 4.SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF LAW AND JUSTICE, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, OLD SECRETARIATE, PATNA. 5.BIHAR STATE LEGAL AID BOARD, THROUGH ITS SECRETARY, 'ASHRAM' 51(A)/C.S.K.PURI, PATNA. ............RESPONDENTS. ----------- 06/ 12.05.2011 No one appears for the petitioner. Counsel for the State is present and would submit that grievance of the petitioner as with regard to grant of special pay for the period of his deputation as Member Secretary in the Bihar State Legal Aid Board from 19.12.1989 to 29.12.1992 is not only belated, inasmuch as, the writ application was filed on 10.03.1997 but even otherwise it is not admissible as has been explained in the counter affidavit. In this regard, he has invited attention of this Court to para 4 of the counter affidavit which reads as 2 follows:- 'That before controverting any allegation it is submitted that special pay is admissible to the post and not to the rank. The rank of the member secretary of the Bihar State Legal Aid Board does not come under the purview of that post. Hence no member secretary has ever been any special pay. Similarly the nature of the job being neither arduous nor un- healthy disenities any benefit of Rule 42 of the Bihar Service Code 1952. Since, the board is wholly owned by the State Govt. neither the employer nor the mode charges while serving the Board as contained in Finance Department Memo NO. 3/F1-9010/96- 1866B, dated 22.07.1999 & Memo No. 3/M-1-906/77-375B dated 06.01.1998. As such the grievances of the writ petitioner are not genuine and deserve no consideration.' In the considered opinion of this Court, learned counsel for the State is correct, inasmuch as, special pay has to be sanctioned for a particular assignment, appointment or deputation to the post and not to the person. The terms and conditions of deputation of the petitioner did not contain any provision for grant of special pay and therefore, this belated realization of such grievance after more than 8 years of his accepting the deputation and working on the deputed post is even otherwise fit to be rejected. 3 That being so, this application is accordingly dismissed. Ranjan (Mihir Kumar Jha, J)