IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.8880 of 2009 DR.RAJESHWAR PRASAD PANDEY, SON OF LATE ERAM ANUP PANDEY, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE SAIDPUR, P.S. CHAKMEHASHI, DISTRICT – SAMASTIPUR. ………… PETITIONER. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR. 2. SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA. 3. PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA. 4. DIRECTOR-IN-CHIEF, HEALTH SERVICES, BIHAR, PATNA. 5. DIRECTOR, HIGHER EDUCATION, BIHAR, PATNA. 6. PRINCIPAL, DHARM SAMAJ SANSKRIT MAHAVIDYALAYA, RAMBAGH, MUZAFFARPUR. 7. KAMESHWAR SINGH DARBHANGA SANSKRIT UNIVERSITY THROUGH ITS REGISTRAR, DARBHANGA. ………… RESPONDENTS. ----------- For the Petitioner : - For the University : - Mr. Shivesh Chandra Mishra, Advocate For the State : - Mr. Anil Kumar Verma, AC to AAG 13 05/ 05.07.2011 No one appears for the petitioner. Counsel appearing for Kameshwar Singh Darbhanga Sanskrit University and the counsel representing State are present. Prayer of the petitioner in this writ application is for a direction to the respondents to treat his date of superannuation as 62 years in view of the Bihar Service (Amendment) Rules, 2009 issued under the signature of Deputy Secretary to the Government. Petitioner was appointed on the post of Vaidya (Lecturer) in Dharm Samaj Sanskrit Mahavidyalaya, Rambagh, Muzaffarpur. Petitioner’s grievance is that despite the fact 2 that he was working on the post of Vaidya (doctor) he was not given any promotion, which is given to the employees of Health Services. The college became constituent in the year, 1982 and the petitioner was asked to give his option regarding remaining in University service or in govt. service. Petitioner opted for govt. service and he also acquired the degree of D.A.M.S. His grievance is that the Govt. enhanced the age of superannuation of its employee working in the Health Service. The age of superannuation was enhanced from 60 years to 62 years vide notification contained in Memo No. 1262 dated 25.2.2009. So far petitioner is concerned, he is not being given benefit of this govt. notification regarding enhancement of age of superannuation. Counter affidavit filed on behalf of University indicates that the petitioner opted for Govt. Service as such he was treated as Govt. Servant under Education Department. He had also enjoyed all benefits extended to a Govt. Servant working under Education Department. The age of superannuation of University employee is 62 years and the same was for 3 the employees of Health Service, but the service of petitioner being under Education Department is governed by the Service Conditions applicable to an employee of Education Department. He cannot claim his entitlement for enhancement of his age of superannuation age, which is applicable in the case of University employee or an employee of Bihar Health Service. Considering these facts, I do not find any reason to consider the prayer of the petitioner to treat his age of superannuation as 62 years, specially for the reason that Bihar Service (Amendment) Rules 2009 contained in Memo No. 1262 dated 25.2.2009 has no application to the service conditions of the petitioner being an employee of the Education Department. This application is dismissed. DKS/ (Mridula Mishra, J.)