IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LPA No.852 of 1999 JAGADISH PANDEY son of late Sheopujan Pandey R/o village Adafa P.O. Kanjharuon , Dist. Buxar…Appellant Versus 2.THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. Inspector General, Home guard Chhajubagh, Patna 3. Commandant, Home guard Chhajubagh, Patna 4. District Commandant Homeguard Harmoo Ranchi. ..Respondents. ----------- 4 16.11.2010 Heard Mr. Gopal Pandey, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. Ashok Kumar Dubey , learned A.C. to A.A.G- 9.This appeal under clause 10 of the Letter Patent of the High Court of Judicature at Patna, raises a grievance with respect to the order dated 23.6.1999 (Annexure-4), whereby C.W.J.C. No.4290 of 1998 (Jagadish Pandey Vs. State of Bihar & ors), has been dismissed. We have perused the materials on record and considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties. It appears that the petitioner had initially served Bharat Coking Coal Ltd from 10.10.1972 till 1981 as Hawaldar. It further appears that he joined the Bihar Homeguards in 1981, and superannuated from the services of the Government of Bihar with effect from 29.2.1996. The petitioner raises a grievance in the writ petition that the Govt. of Bihar is not giving him the benefit of service rendered by him from 10.10.1972 to 1981, which, if added, will enhance his post-retiral benefits. The writ petition has been dismissed by the impugned order. The learned Single Judge has relied upon the order dated 28.6.1994, passed in L.P.A. No. 41 of 1991. In spite of the repeated queries, the learned counsel for the appellant has not been able to bring to our notice the orders by which 2 the appellant was initially appointed and he had started serving B.C.C.L, and the order by which he was appointed in the Bihar Government. It further appears to us that the petitioner had joined the State Govt. service in 1981 and cannot, therefore, get the benefit of service of B.C.C.L. It further appears that similar issues have been rejected by this Court earlier, and upheld by the Supreme Court. We agree with the order of the learned Single Judge. We do not find any merit in this appeal. It is accordingly dismissed. (S.K. Katriar, J) M.Rahman ( Birendra Prasad Verma, J )