IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.9472 of 2006 RAS BIHARI RAI, son of Late Gaya Rai, resident of village-Dumara, P.S.Dinara, District-Rohtas Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. The District Superintendent of Education, Buxar, District-Buxar. 3. The Treasury Officer, Buxar, District- Buxar. 4. The Accountant General, Bihar, Patna. ----------- 8 17.02.2010 Heard Mr. Ras Bihari Thakur learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, Mr. Arjun Prasad Singh, A.C. to S.C. 2 for the State and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Accountant General. Pursuant to the orders of this Court the admissible dues of the petitioner stand paid to him. Learned counsel further submits that the objection of the Accountant General as contained in Annexure-1 is not in accordance with law inasmuch as the petitioner was drawing salary in the scale of 1400/- to 2600/- but under the objection raised by the Accountant General, the pension and the pensionary benefits were calculated on the basis of Rs. 2540/- per month i.e. by reducing the salary by one increment. Learned counsel thus submits that since the petitioner superannuated while 2 drawing the salary of Rs. 2600/- per month hence the retiral benefits ought to have been calculated on the said basis. A Counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the Accountant General and in which it has been stated that as the date of increment of the petitioner was first of January each year hence by oversight or some confusion, the petitioner in addition to grant of increment on 1.1.1986 was again granted second increment in the same year i.e. on 1.4.1986 and thus was given two increments in the said year which was not proper as the entitlement is only once a year. It is this mistake which is sought to be rectified under the orders as contained in Annexure-1 whereby the increment of Rs. 60 has been recalled and the salary of the petitioner has been determined at Rs. 2540/-. I find no infirmity in the objection raised by the Accountant General, as no employee is entitled to two increments within the same year. In that view of the matter, the determination of the retrial benefits of the petitioner in the light of the objection raised by the Accountant General in the letter dated 3 18.2.1998, Annexure-1 is perfectly in accordance with law and there is no infirmity in the same. I, however, find that the petitioner superannuated from the post of Assistant Teacher with effect from 31.10.1996 from the Middle School, Bikram English, P.S. Itarhi, District-Buxar and the gratuity amount has been paid to the petitioner after lapse of 13 years. The petitioner is certainly entitled for payment of statutory interest on the belated payment. The Government circular on this issue contained in letter No. PC-2-46/79/E 155 dated 7.11.1981 present at appendix 6 part II of the Bihar Pension Rules 1950 provides for payment of interest @ 5% per annum for the period beyond three months after the pension and gratuity amount became due to a retiring employee. In that view of the matter, the petitioner having retired on 31.10.1996 would also be entitled for payment of interest at the rate of 5% per annum on the gratuity amount to be calculated with effect from January, 1997 until the date of its payment and which should be paid within three months from the date of production of a copy of this order. 4 The writ petition is disposed of. As the writ petition stands disposed of by the aforesaid order nothing survives in the contempt application and the same is also disposed of in the light of the order passed in the writ petition. Bibhash (Jyoti Saran, J. )