IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.3474 of 2008 RANGI LAL SINGH Versus THE UNION OF INDIA & ORS ----------- For the Petitioner : Mr. Pawan Kumar Mishra, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. H.P. Singh, Advocate ----------- P R E S E N T Hon'ble the Chief Justice & Hon'ble Mr. Justice Kishore K. Mandal ------------ Dated, the 17th September, 2008. The Tribunal has noticed in the impugned order that the reversion of the petitioner to the post of Mate has been upheld by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Allahabad bench and therefore on the date of his superannuation, the post of Mate is to be treated for the purposes of pension. This is how the Tribunal considered the matter: “Learned counsel for the applicant could not place any rule or law before us which would allow the applicant his prayer as made in this O.A., particularly when he had reverted back to the post of Mate in the year 2001 and from that post he had superannuated on 31.1.2007. Under the Pension Rules, therefore, his average pay for the purpose of pension would be counted in the pay scale he was receiving, or was entitled to receive, at the time of his superannuation. The Allahabad Bench of the C.A.T. having decided his reversion to the post of Mate in the year 2001 to be valid, it was the post of Mate that the applicant was holding on the date of his superannuation. Under no rule or law he can now claim his pension and the pensionary benefits to be fixed on the basis of the higher pay he was getting about six years prior to his superannuation, when temporarily promoted to that post on ad-hoc basis.” - 2 - 2. The consideration of the matter does not suffer from any legal infirmity justifying any interference by us. 3. Writ petition is dismissed accordingly. R. M. Lodha, CJ Kishore K. Mandal, J. Anil/