IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.10631 of 2011 Sushil Prasad Singh, Son of Late Sri Haldhar Prasad Singh Resident of Mohalla Khas Bazar, Puranichowk, Haveli Kharagpur, P.O. & P.S. Haveli Kharagpur, District Munger (Bihar). ... ... Petitioner. Versus 1. The Tilka Manjhi Bhagalpur University, Bhagalpur through the Vice Chancellor. 2. The Vice Chancellor, Tilka Manjhi Bhagalpur University, Bhagalpur. 3. The Registrar, Tilka Manjhi Bhagalpur University, Bhagalpur. 4. The Finance Officer, Tilka Manjhi Bhagalpur University, Bhagalpur. 5. The Principal, Hari Singh College, Haveli Kharagpur, Munger (A Constituent Unit of T.M. Bhagalpur University, Bhagalpur). 6. The State of Bihar, through Principal Secretary, Finance Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 7. The Secretary, Human Resources Development Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. ... ... Respondents. ----------- 4. 12.7.2011. Heard Shri Radha Raman Verma, learned counsel for the petitioner, Shri Anil Singh, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent nos.1 to 4/Tilka Manjhi Bhagalpur University and Shri Rajesh Singh, learned G.P.16 appearing on behalf of respondent nos.6 and 7. The petitioner, who retired with effect from 31.1.2005 as Reader, Hari Singh College, Haveli Kharagpur (Munger) under Tilka Manjhi Bhagalpur University, has prayed for directing the respondents to revise his pension in view of Government 2 Resolution No.820 dated 23.9.2009 with effect from 1.1.2006, for a direction for granting relief of merger of 50% Dearness relief on his basic pension with effect from 1.1.2005 and payment of arrear of pension after revision and also for a direction to make payment of amount of leave encashment. So far as prayer for revision of pension and merger of 50% Dearness relief on the basic pension is concerned, it was submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that issue involved in this case has already been settled by this Court in number of cases including C.W.J.C. No.3616 of 2010 (Dr. Himanshu Bhushan Vs. Tilka Manjhi Bhagalpur University and others) and other connected writ petitions disposed of on 3.12.2010. Learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn my attention to Annexure-3 to the petition i.e. a photo copy of order dated 3.12.2010. Learned counsel for the respondents is not in a position to dispute the fact that order has been passed in the similar case by this Court. Accordingly, the court is of the 3 opinion that relief of the petitioner so far as claim of revision of pension with effect from 1.1.2006 and grant of 50% merger on the basic pension of the petitioner with effect from 1.1.2005 can be granted in terms of order passed in Dr. Himanshu Bhushan’s case (Supra). Accordingly, the aforesaid two reliefs are allowed in terms of order dated 3.12.2010 passed in C.W.J.C. No.3616 of 2010. So far as claim of leave encashment is concerned, with the consent of parties, the writ petition is being disposed of granting liberty to the petitioner to file representation before respondent no.2/Vice Chancellor within a period of six weeks from today. If such representation is filed, court expects that respondent no.2 will examine the same and pass appropriate order in accordance with law redressing the grievances of the petitioner within a period of four months from the date of filing of such representation. Even in case of refusal, respondent no.2 is required to pass a speaking order within aforesaid time and such order should be communicated to 4 the petitioner within said time. The court expects that if any requisition is sent by the University for allocation of fund to redress the grievance of the petitioner, the respondent/State, without any delay, will allocate the fund. With above observation and direction, the writ petition stands disposed of. N.H./ ( Rakesh Kumar,J.)