IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Letters Patent Appeal No.1717 of 2011 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 12113 of 2000 With Interlocutory Application No. 7860 of 2011 And Interlocutory Application No. 7861 of 2011 And Interlocutory Application No. 7864 of 2011 In Letters Patent Appeal No. 1717 of 2011 ====================================================== Unit Head, RBHM, National Jute Manufacturers Corporation Limited, Unit Katihar. .... .... Appellant/ Respondent no. 7(in writ petition) Versus 1. Sheo Kumar Shukla, S/o Late Baijnath Shukla , R/O Durgapur, P.S., P.O. & District- Katihar. …… Respondent/petitioner (in writ petition) 2. Union of India through Secretary, Ministry of Textile, Government of India, Udyog Bhawan, New Delhi 3. Joint Secretary, Ministry of Textile, Government of India, Udyog Bhawan, New Delhi 4. National Jute Manufactures Corporation Ltd., a Government of India Undertaking having its registered office at Chatered Bank Buildings (2nd Floor), 4 N.S. Road, Calcutta-700001 through its Chairman-Cum- Director. 5. Chairman-Cum-Managing Director, National Jute Manufactures Corporation Ltd., a Government of India Undertaking having its registered office at Chatered Bank Buildings (2nd Floor), 4 N.S. Road, Calcutta-700001. 6. Officiating Assistant General Manager (Personnel), National Jute Manufactures Corporation Ltd., a Government of India Undertaking having its registered office at Chatered Bank Buildings (2nd Floor), 4 N.S. Road, Calcutta-700001. 7. Deputy Manager (Personnel) National Jute Manufactures Corporation Ltd., a Government of India Undertaking having its registered office at Patna High Court LPA No.1717 of 2011 (3) dt.24-11-2011 2 / 6 2 Chatered Bank Buildings (2nd Floor), 4 N.S. Road, Calcutta - 700001 8. Arvind Kumar Singh, working as Personnel In-charge, National Jute Manufactures Corporation Limited, Unit RBHM, Katihar. 9. Arun Kumar Chakraborty, working as Deputy Manager (Finance), National Jute Manufactures Corporation Limited Unit, RBHM, Katihar. .... .... Respondents/Respondents ====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant/s : Mr. Anjan Chakraborty Mr. Kumar Dhirendra Pratap, Advocates. For the Respondent no. 1: Mr. Suresh Prasad Singh No. 1, Advocate. For the Union of India : Mr. S.N.Pathak, Sr. S.C., C.G. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA PRASAD VERMA ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) 3 24-11-2011 Learned Advocate Mr. Anjan Chakraborty has appeared for the appellant. He states that the respondent no. 4- National Jute Manufactures Corporation Ltd. is the company of which the appellant is a Unit and the respondent nos. 5 to 9 are the officers of the respondent no. 4. He states that no relief is claimed against the respondent nos. 4 to 9. He, therefore, seeks leave to delete the respondent nos. 4 to 9. Leave to delete the respondent nos. 4 to 9 from the cause title of appeal and the applications. Necessary correction will be made within two weeks from today. Re. Interlocutory application No. 7860 of 2011: This application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act is filed by the appellant RBHM, National Jute Manufacturers Corporation Limited for condonation of delay of 491days occurred in filing the Letters Patent Appeal. It appears that against the impugned judgment dated Patna High Court LPA No.1717 of 2011 (3) dt.24-11-2011 3 / 6 3 22nd April 2010 passed by the learned single Judge in above CWJC No. 12113 of 2000, the appellant had pursued the remedy of review in Civil Review No. 177 of 2010. The said review application was rejected on 3rd August 2011. That order has been challenged by the appellant in L.P.A. No. 1463 of 2011. After preliminary hearing of the said appeal, the present Appeal is filed on 17th November 2011. Therefore, the delay. Learned Advocate Mr. Suresh Prasad Singh No. 1 appears for the respondent no. 1. He has contested the application. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the delay is condoned. Interlocutory application stands disposed of. Re. Letters Patent Appeal No. 1717 of 2011: This Appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent is preferred by the RBHM, National Jute Manufacturers Corporation Limited(hereinafter referred to as ‘the Corporation’), a Unit of the National Jute Manufactures Corporation Limited, against the judgment and order dated 22nd April 2010 passed by the learned single Judge in above CWJC No. 12113 of 2000 insofar as the learned single Judge has directed “the Corporation to consider the case of the petitioner for grant of revised scale in the light of the instructions contained in letters dated 13.07.1992, 05.12.1997 and 12.03.1998, Annexures 2, 3 and 4 as and when the Corporation decides to grant the benefit of revised scale to the other employees. It is, however, made clear that if the other employees of the Corporation have already been allowed the benefit of further revised scale then the case of petitioner for grant of higher scale in the light of the revision accepted by Patna High Court LPA No.1717 of 2011 (3) dt.24-11-2011 4 / 6 4 the Corporation should also be considered and granted in accordance with law”. The writ petitioner was employed by the Corporation as a Clerk. On 13th July 1992 the writ petitioner was transferred as a teacher in the preparatory school run and managed by the Corporation. Under the terms and conditions of the transfer and posting as the teacher, the writ petitioner was assured Pay and Dearness Allowance applicable to the primary teachers in the State of Bihar. Since his appointment he had been granted benefit of revision of pay in 1997. He was also given the interim relief as was offered by the Government of Bihar to its primary teachers under the memo dated 12th March 1998. As he was not given the benefit of further revision of pay, he filed the above CWJC No. 12113 of 2000 under Article 226 of the Constitution to bring parity of pay with the teachers in the State of Bihar. Pending the writ petition, the appellant was declared sick and was referred to the Board for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Board’). Under the Scheme for Voluntary Retirement approved by the Board, the Corporation offered a voluntary retirement scheme to its employees. The writ petitioner accepted the offer for voluntary retirement under the above referred Voluntary Retirement Scheme. The said offer was accepted by the Corporation. The writ petitioner was allowed to retire from service with effect from 30th April 2009. He was also paid the terminal dues as approved under the Voluntary Retirement Scheme. It is the case of the appellant that the factum of the voluntary retirement of the appellant was not known to the counsels appearing for the parties and the said factum could not be Patna High Court LPA No.1717 of 2011 (3) dt.24-11-2011 5 / 6 5 brought to the notice of the learned single Judge. It is submitted that once the writ petitioner had been allowed to retire from service and had been paid retiral dues, the fiduciary relationship as master and servant between the Corporation and the writ petitioner stood severed. The petitioner thereafter cannot have any claim against the Corporation. He has submitted that the petitioner, therefore, cannot have a claim for revision of pay, if adopted by the Corporation after the date of the retirement of the writ petitioner. Learned counsel Mr. S.N.Pathak has submitted that the relationship of the master and servant between the Corporation and the writ petitioner having been severed , the direction to give the benefit of revision of pay thereafter cannot be sustained. Learned Advocate Mr. Suresh Prasad Singh No. 1 has appeared for the respondent no. 1. He has contested the Appeal. He has taken us through the counter affidavit filed by the writ petitioner in L.P.A. No. 1463 of 2011. He has submitted that in respect of other employees who had opted for voluntary retirement, the Corporation has granted arrears of pay and allowances even after the date of the retirement. The writ petitioner is entitled to a similar treatment. He has taken us through the computation of the retiral dues paid to the writ petitioner. He has submitted that the writ petitioner has not been paid certain retiral dues to which he is entitled. He has also submitted that part of the retiral dues has been paid to the writ petitioner long after the date of the retirement. The question of retirement of the writ petitioner under the Voluntary Retirement Scheme framed by the Corporation and the quantum of retiral dues paid to the petitioner Patna High Court LPA No.1717 of 2011 (3) dt.24-11-2011 6 / 6 6 are not the subject matter of the present proceeding. We agree with the learned counsel. Once the writ petitioner retired from service, the master and servant relationship between the Corporation and the writ petitioner came to an end. After the date of retirement and payment of the retiral dues, the writ petitioner cannot have any claim against the Corporation; nor the Corporation is under obligation to extend the service benefit including the revision of pay and allowances made effective after the date of retirement. For the aforesaid reasons, this Appeal is allowed. The impugned judgment and order dated 22nd April 2010 passed by the learned single Judge in above CWJC No. 12113 of 2000 stands modified to the above extent. Interlocutory applications stand disposed of. Sujit/- (R.M. Doshit, CJ) (Birendra Prasad Verma, J)