IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.6919 of 2006 LAKSHMI NARAYAN THAKUR Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 03/ 05.05.2010 Mr. Satish Chandra Jha for the petitioner, Mr. Anil Kumar Jha, Government Advocate No. 2 for the State and Mr. Sanjay Kumar for the Accountant General are present. The petitioner superannuated while holding the post of Regional Inspecting Officer, Patna Division, Patna with effect from 31.12.1997. Upon non-payment of his post retiral benefits, he filed a writ petition giving rise to C.W.J.C. No. 11848 of 1998 which was disposed of vide order dated 16.02.1999 (Annexure-1), directing the respondent no. 2 i.e. the Commissioner-cum-Secretary, Department of Labour Employment and Training, Government of Bihar to decide the pending representation of the petitioner in accordance with law and make payment of the dues as found admissible to the petitioner, within one month from the date of disposal of the representation with statutory interest. Despite the direction of this Court the concerned respondent no. 2 did not take steps towards disposal of the claim of the petitioner which led to filing of a contempt application at the instance of the petitioner bearing MJ.C. No. 3557 of 1999. A show cause was filed mentioning therein that the entire retiral benefits as found admissible to the petitioner, together with admissible interest had been paid. Unfortunately, no body appeared on behalf of the petitioner at the stage of the contempt application and thus the same - 2 - was disposed of in the light to the statement made in the show cause. A copy of the order passed in the contempt application is placed at Annexure-4 of the writ petition and the order disposing the claim of the petitioner is placed at Annexure-B to the counter affidavit. Following the retirement of the petitioner a pay-revision took place in the State vide Finance Department resolution no. 660 dated 8.2.1999 with effect from 1.1.1996 with stipulations of actual payment from 1.4.1997. As the petitioner had superannuated on 31.12.1997, hence he became entitled for payment of differential salary amount with effect from 1.4.1997 until 31.12.1997 as also to the re-fixation and re-calculation of his post retiral benefits. The petitioner, in the meantime, was also granted a second time bound promotion with effect from 26.7.1993 under order bearing memo no. 38 dated 16.02.2006 (Annexure-5). The petitioner represented the authorities for payment of the arrears of salary by reason of the grant of time bound promotion with effect from 26.07.1993 up to 31.12.1995 in the light of the order contained in Annexure-5 as also for grant of notional benefits of revision with effect from 1.1.1996 and of actual payment of salary by reason of such revision with effect from 1.4.1997 until 31.12.1997 i.e. the date of retirement. Having failed to get the grievances redressed at the hands of the respondent authorities, the present writ petition was filed for a direction to the respondents to revise the entire pensionary benefits of the petitioner in view of the pay-revision after grant of benefit of second time bound promotion and for re-fixation and re-calculation of the pension gratuity, leave - 3 - encashment and other admissible dues. A further prayer was made for a direction to the Director, Provident Fund to provide the calculation chart in relation to the G.P.F. amount. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the State and in which it was stated that as the petitioner was facing criminal charges arising from a Vigilance case bearing Special Case No. 23 of 1989 and in which charge sheet had already bee submitted, hence he was not entitled to full pension and gratuity amount which would be subject to the outcome of the Vigilance case. It was further stated that the direction had been issued to the District Provident Fund Officer, vide letter dated 25.8.1998 (Annexure-A) to the counter affidavit for redressing the grievance of the petitioner. It was thus contended that the balance post retiral benefits of the petitioner relating to pension, gratuity, unutilized leave would be subject to final outcome of the proceedings. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in view of the stipulations contained in the Finance Department letter no. 3014 dated 31.7.1980 and reiterated in the Finance’s Department letter dated 23.8.2004 (Annexure-9), the respondents cannot withhold the payment of the pension of the petitioner to the extent of 90 per cent. He further submits that in view of the definition of Gratuity present in Rule 27 of the Bihar Pension Rules, the petitioner would also be entitled to 90 per cent of the gratuity amount. It is submitted that apart from the aforesaid restrictions, the respondents can in no circumstances withhold the unutilized leave salary amount which is - 4 - earned by the petitioner for the services rendered. The petitioner has filed a supplementary affidavit setting out the pending claims in paragraph-6 thereof and which are as follows:- (i) Full Gratuity in revised scale, (ii) Full Leave-in-cashment in revised scale, (iii) Difference amount of pension due to pay revision which was made effective w.e.f. 01.01.1996, and (iv) Difference of arrear of salary by virtue of grant of 2nd time bound promotion. I find force in the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner and the petitioner is definitely entitled to his dues as admissible under rules/circular of the State Government. Having regard to the circumstances aforesaid, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent no. 2, the Commissioner-cum-Secretary, Department of Labour and Training to consider the pending claim of the petitioner as noted in this order and after carrying out the exercise of re-fixation and re-calculation in view of the pay-revision, make payment of the pending claims of the petitioner to the extent of 90 per cent pension, 90 % gratuity, the leave encashment amount and the differential salary amount by reason of time bound promotion and the pay revision within a period of three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. The Director, Provident Fund shall also ensure that the petitioner is provided with a calculation chart containing the detail of deductions and interest also within the period stipulated above. S.Sb/- (Jyoti Saran, J.) - 5 -