IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.14388 of 2011 Ms.Shivani Chaudhary D/O Late B.M. Chaudhary presently residing at Flat No.-118, Shivam Apartment, Sadpur Nahar, Post Office- Kadamkuan, Police Station-Kadamkuan, Patna-800004 And Working As Receptionist-Cum-Telephone Operator, Bihar State Electronics Development Corporation Limited, Bailey Road, Patna ---Petitioner Versus 1. The Principle Secretary, Dept. Of Information Technology, Govt. Of Bihar, Patna 2. The Principle Secretary, Finance Govt. Of Bihar, Old Secretariat, Patna 3. The Under Secretary, Department Of Information Technology, Govt. Of Bihar, Patna 4. The Manager (Marketing) Cum Secretary, Bihar State Electronics Development Corporation Limited, Shastri Nagar, Patna 5. Managing Director, Bihar State Electronics Development Corporation Limited, Sahstri Nagar, Patna ---Respondents. ---- With Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.14451 of 2011 1. Braj Bihari Pathak S/O Late Brindavan Pathak R/O Vill.- Bihta, P.O. Bihta, P.S.Bihta, Distt.- Patna And Presently Working As Assembly Operator, Bihar State Electronics Development Corporation Limited, Bailey Road, Patna ---Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Bihar Through The Chief Secretary Govt, Of Bihar, Patna 2. The Principle Secretary, Department Of Information Technology Govt. Of Bihar, Patna 3. The Principle Secretary, Finance Govt. Of Bihar, Old Secretariat, Patna 4. The Deputy Secretary, Department Of Information Technology Govt. Of Bihar, Patna 5. The Manager (Marketing) Cum Secretary, Bihar State Electronics Development Corporation Limited, Shastri Nagar, Patna 6. Managing Director, Bihar State Electronics Development Corporation Limited, Sahstri Nagar, Patna ---Respondents. --------- With Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.14463 of 2011 2 1. Jitendra Kumar S/O Late Ambika Prasad Singh Permanent Address - Vill.- Pyarepur, P.O.- Pyarepur, P.S.- Sarmera, Distt.- Nalanda and Presently Working As Assembly Operator, Bihar State Electronics Development Corporation Limited, Bailey Road, Patna ---Petitioner Versus 1. The Principle Secretary Department Of Information Technology, Govt. Of Bihar, Patna 2. The Principal Secretary Finance, Government Of Bihar, Old Secretariat, Patna 3. The Under Secretary Department Of Information Technology, Govt. Of Bihar, Patna 4. The Manager (Marketing) Cum Secretary Bihar State Electronics Development Corporation Limited, Shastri Nagar, Patna 5. Managing Director Bihar State Electronics Development Corporation Limited, Shastri Nagar, Patna -Respondents. --------- With Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.15213 of 2011 1. Rajendra Roy s/o Late Lal Kishun Roy, resident of village-Raghunath Tola, Post office-Anishabad, P.S. Gardanibagh Dist. Patna and Presently Working As Assistant, Bihar State Electronics Development Corporation Limited, Bailey Road, Patna . --Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Bihar Through The Chief Secretary, Govt. Of Bihar, Patna. 2. The Principal Secretary, Department Of Information Technology, Govt. Of Bihar, Patna. 3. The Principal Secretary, Finance, Government Of Bihar, Old Secretariat, Patna. 4. The Deputy Secretary, Department Of Information Technology, Govt. Of Bihar, Patna. 5. The Manager (Marketing)-Cum-Secretary, Bihar State Electronics Development Corporation Limited, Shastri Nagar, Patna. 6. Managing Director, Bihar State Electronics Development Corporation Limited, Shastri Nagar, Patna. ---Respondents. In C.WJC No. 14388 of 2011 For the Petitioner : Mr. Ajit Kumar, Advocate. For the State : Mr. P. K.Verma, A.C. To S.C.26 In C.WJC No.14463 of 2011 3 For the State : Mr. Akash Chaturvedi, A.C. To AAG 12 In C.WJC No. 14451 of 2011 For the State : Mr. Pankaj Kumar Sinha, AC to AAG-13. For Beltron : Mr. Sourendra Pandey, Advocate. ----------- 03 19.09.2011 In the present batch of writ petitions, common issues are involved, and as such, they have been clubbed together and are being disposed of by the present order with the consent of the parties. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned counsel for the respondent Bihar State Electronics Development Corporation Limited ( for short ‘BELTRON’) and learned Assistant Counsel to Standing Counsel no. 26 for the respondent State and its official. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the Managing Director of the Beltron has made a request to the Government in the Department of Information Technology by a communication dated 11.03.2011 (Annexure-8), requesting therein the respondent State to take appropriate decision for enhancing the age of superannuation of the employees of Beltron from 58 years to 60 years. The Managing Director founded his request on certain facts elaborated therein. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that this Court considered the aforesaid issue in CWJC No. 12003 of 2011 ( Ratan Kumar Sinha vs. The Principle Secretary, Department of Information Technology & Ors.) and, by an order dated 18.08.2011, disposed of the matter directing the authorities of the State to take an appropriate decision in accordance with law. The copy of the said order has been handed in by Mr. Ajit Kumar which is kept on record marked ‘X’. 4 A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondent nos. 1 and 3 in CWJC No.14388 of 2011 ( Ms. Shivani Choudhary vs. The Principle Secretary, Department of Information Technology & Ors.) Learned Assistant Counsel to Standing Counsel no. 26 appearing on behalf of the State and its official(s), with reference to pleadings made in paragraph nos. 6 to 17 of the counter affidavit, contends that the Beltron was under liquidation. Subsequently, it provided certain materials based on which the authorities have first to take a decision to terminate the liquidation proceeding. It is contended that the authorities have already requested the Beltron to furnish all other relevant documents and materials enabling the Government to first terminate the pending proceeding of liquidation of the Beltron and thereafter to take an appropriate decision on the request of the Managing Director for according permission to enhance the age of the employees of Beltron from 58 years to 60 years. Learned counsel for the respondent Beltron states that they would appropriately respond to the request of the Government and furnish all relevant documents enabling the Government to first consider termination of the pending liquidation proceeding and thereafter to take appropriate decision on the request of the Beltron to accord permission for enhancing the age of its employees from 58 years to 60 years. On a consideration of submissions made on behalf of the parties and keeping in focus the order dated 18.08.2011 passed in CWJC No. 12003 of 2011, this Court disposes of the application by 5 the following order:- Let respondent Corporation furnish all required details/materials to the Government within a period of 08 weeks whereafter the respondent State and its official shall take appropriate decision in accordance with law within a period of 08 weeks therefrom. Learned counsel submits that petitioner would in the meanwhile superannuate from service on attaining the age of superannuation ( 58 years). If that be so, this Court clarifies that in case the respondent ultimately decide on enhancing the age of superannuation of the employees of Beltron the petitioner shall be reinducted into service for serving the remainder period of their service. Sym ( Kishore K. Mandal, J.)