CIVIL WRIT JURISDICTION CASE No.4895 OF 2000 ------ In the matter of an application under Articles 226 and 22 Of the Constitution of Indian. ----- Central Board for worker's Education through its Regional Director Shri R.H.N.Thakur at + O.P. Damuchak,Muzaffarpur, Pin-842001 --Petitioner Versus 1.The Central Adminis.Tribunal, Patna Bench, Shri Krishna Nagar, Patna 2.Sadhu Prasad Sharma S/o Late Gopichand Singh, resident of Mohalla Chitragupta Nagar, P.S. Kankarbagh, Dist. Patna ------Respondents. ---- For The Petitioner : Mr.S.N.PATHAK (ASCCG) Mr. Binay Kumar Pandey For The Respondents: Mr.SUSHANTA KUMAR DAS Mr. Ratna Das Counsel for the respondents ****** P R E S E N T THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR KUMAR KATRIAR THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA PRASAD VERMA ****** S.K.Katriar,J. This writ petition is directed against the judgment dated 2.12.1999, passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Patna Bench, in O.A. No. 403 of 1998 (Sadhu Prasad Sharma Vs. Union of India & others), whereby the original application preferred by the respondent no.2 herein has been allowed, and petitioner and Bihar State Electricity Board have been directed to share the post-retirement benefits of the respondent herein on pro rata basis. 2. A brief statement of facts initial for the disposal of the writ petition may be indicated. Respondent no.2 herein had joined the services of the Central Board for Workers’ Education in short (CBWE), Govt. of India, Ministry of Labour, as Education Officer at Dhanbad. He continued as such till 17.1.1978, and was on deputation with the Bihar 2 State Electricity Board (in short BSEB), on 18.1.1978, as Deputy Director of Personnel for two years. Respondent no.2 continued with BSEB till his superannuation on 31.1.1994. After his superannuation the dispute arose about the liability of the petitioner and BSEB to share the post-retiral benefits admissible to respondent no.2, leading to the aforesaid O.A. No. 403 of 1998. The original application preferred by respondent no.2 herein has been allowed by the impugned order and authorities have been directed to consider the case of the respondent herein on the following terms: “In view of the facts and circumstances of the case as analysed above, we dispose of this application by directing the respondents to consider the case of the applicant for the pensionary benefits on pro rata basis for the period, he worked with CBWE, subject to his refunding the CPF amount, which he may have received from CBWE and settle his claim, within a period of four months from the date of receipt of this order, in accordance with law. With the above direction, this O.A. is disposed of at the admission stage”. 3. This order was followed by a contempt proceeding before the Tribunal. The petitioner, therefore, preferred the present writ petition and the analogous CWJC No. 6825 of 2002, which were directed against the final order passed in the original application, as well as in the contempt proceeding. Both the writ petitions were disposed of by a common order passed by this Court on 26.6.2002. The petitioner herein challenged the same by preferring SLP No. 24841-24842/2002, before the 3 Supreme Court which was allowed by order dated 20.2.2004, whereby the order of the High Court was set aside, and the matter was remitted for fresh consideration. That is how the matter has come up before us. 4. We have perused the materials on record and considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties. It appears that the dispute is between the petitioner and BSEB as to how much post-retirement benefits shall be shared by each. BSEB has not been impleaded as a party respondent herein, though the present writ petition has remained pending for ten years. It is not possible to proceed with the matter in the absence of the BSEB, though it was a respondent before the Tribunal. The fatal lacuna was detected after elaborate submissions have been advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and indeed during the course of dictation of the present order. 5. The writ petition is, therefore, dismissed. (S.K. Katriar, J) Birendra Pd. Verma, J I agree. (B.P. Verma, J) Patna High Court, The 25th June 2010 Rahman/ NAFR