IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.2045 of 2007 KRISHNADEO PRASAD aged about 61 years, son of late Chotu Prasad, resident of village Gopalpur, Police Station Warsaliganj, district Nawadah at presently residing at Road No.6-C, Rajendra Nagar, in the House of Jagarnath Sharma, Police Station Kadamkuan, District Patna. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR through the Secretary, Urban Development Department, having his office in Vikas Bhawan, Police station Sachivalaya, District Patna. 2. The Chief Commissioner, Patna Municipal Corporation, having his office in Patna-Gaya road, Police station Kotwali, district Patna. 3. the Chief Executive officer, Patna Water Board, having his office near Patna High Court, Water Tower, Road, Police Station Kotwali, District-Patna. 4. The Chief Engineer, Patna Water Board, having his office near Patna High Court, Water Tower Road, Police Station Kotwali, District, Patna. ----------- 5 22.03.2010 Mr. Abhay Kumar Shambhu, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. Vinay Kirti Singh, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Water Board. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the Board and in which it has been stated that admissible dues has been calculated but the same has been kept in abeyance in view of the recovery contemplated for over stay of the petitioner in the Water Board quarter. There is however, no response regarding the 2 claim of the petitioner for revision of his pay scale and the consequential benefits flowing therefrom with effect from 1.1.1996. Mr. Vinay Kirti Singh, learned counsel for the Board submits that nodoubt the revised of pay scale which was effective in the State of Bihar from 1.1.1996, was implemented in the Water Board, but only with effect from November 2004 and as the petitioner admittedly superannuated on 17.4.2004 i.e. prior to the date on which the revised pay scale were implemented in the Board, hence he would not be entitled to the benefits of the revised pay scale. It is further stated that nonetheless the petitioner is drawing revised pension as admissible under the revised scale. Learned counsel for the petitioner also admits that the petitioner is drawing his pension in terms of the revised scale. In view of the aforesaid position, the Corporation is directed to forthwith make payment of the entire pending retiral dues of the petitioner within a period of three months from today without effecting any recovery for the reason that despite six years having lapsed 3 since the retirement of the petitioner, the Corporation is yet contemplating proceedings for effecting recovery and which certainly would not be permitted at this belated stage. The writ petition is disposed of with the directions aforesaid. Bibhash (Jyoti Saran, J. )