IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.9120 of 2011 Buchai Mochi SON OF LATE ADHIN MOCHI RESIDNET OF CHANAUR, P.S. CHANAUR, DISTRICT DARBHANGA. Versus 1. The State Of Bihar THROUGH THE SECRETARY, COOPERATIVE DEPARTMENT, BIHAR, PATNA. 2. THE REGISTRAR, COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES, BIHAR, PATNA. 3. THE JOINT REGISTRAR (MARKETING) COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES, BIHAR, PATNA. 4. THE JOINT REGISTRAR, COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES, DARBHANGA DIVISION, DARBHANGA. 5. THE DISTRICT COOPERATIVE OFFICER, MADHUBANI. 6. THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES, JHANJHARPUR ANCHAL, MADHUBANI. ---------------------------------- For the Petitioner :- M/S. Nitiranjan Jha & Rakesh Kumar Jha. For the Respondents :- Mr. Rajesh Singh, G.P. XVI ------- 3 16/08/2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. By virtue of annexure-18 dated 14.09.2010 petitioner was granted provisional pension of 90% treating his date of superannuation on 30.04.2006. Three months down the line, yet another order dated 24.12.2010 came to be issued changing the date of superannuation of the petitioner from 30.04.2006 to 30.04.2004. - 2 - Contention of the learned counsel representing the petitioner is that when a departmental enquiry is going on on such an issue as to what is the date of birth of the petitioner, then where is the occasion to pass such order creating prejudice against the petitioner nor it is understood as to why a change with regard to the age of superannuation was required to be made within three months of one order followed by another. The admitted position is that the departmental enquiry initiated in January, 2010 is still going on. The petitioner has already superannuated even otherwise. If that be so, it will be in the interest of one and all that the departmental proceeding with due cooperation of the petitioner is expedited and brought to an end within a period of four months from today. It is made clear that annexures 18 and 19 will be subject to the finding which may be recorded in the departmental proceeding and the same will not stand out against the petitioner in any manner nor shall it be treated to be prejudicial to the interest of the petitioner because the findings will be dependent on the outcome of the departmental enquiry. - 3 - Annexures- 18 and 19 to that extent will be depending on the enquiry which must be expedited. It is further submitted on behalf of the petitioner that despite the order contained in annexure-18, petitioner is not getting any pension. Since the petitioner was a low paid employee and he cannot survive without pension in these difficult times, let 90% of the pension be authorized to him in terms of annexure-18 interregnum subject to the final result of the departmental proceeding. This writ application is disposed of with the direction aforesaid. AMIN/ (Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J.)