Mahesh Ram v. The State Of Bihar And ORS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Letters Patent Appeal No.2253 of 2015 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.17675 of 2012 ====================================================== Mahesh Ram Son of Hiraman Ram Resident of Village- Piparadih, P.S Aurangabad, District Gaya, at present Quarter No. 9, Dhanmanatri Chhatravas Karmchari Quarter Medical College and Hospital, Patna, P.S - Pirbahore, District Patna.
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar 2.
Director General of Police, Home Guard, Chhajjubagh, Bihar, Patna. 3.
Deputy Inspector General, Home Guard Chhajjubagh Bihar, Patna. 4.
Commandant, Head Quarter, Bihar Home Guard, Patna. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Appellant/s :
Mr. S.K.Singh, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Pawan Kumar Singh, Adv.
For the Respondent/s :
Mr. R.R.K. Pandey, S.C.29 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JYOTI SARAN and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JYOTI SARAN) Date : 08-07-2019 Heard Mr. S.K. Singh, learned Senior counsel for the appellant- petitioner and Mr. Sakib Ajaz, A.C. to AAG 13 for the State.
It is feeling aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 06.01.2014 of a learned Single Judge passed in C.W.J.C. No. 17675 of 2012 whereby the learned Single Judge without interfering with the decision of the respondent to superannuate the petitioner with effect from 30.04.2005 has reserved his right to draw salary for the period during which work was taken from
Patna High Court L.P.A No.2253 of 2015 dt.08-07-2019 2/3 the petitioner by the respondents, that he is before this Court. Pleadings on record would confirm that it is following some doubts as regarding the date of birth of the appellant- writ petitioner that a proceeding was initiated and which culminated in an order dated 14.09.2011 of the Commandant, Bihar Home Guards, Patna whereby the petitioner was superannuated with effect from 30.04.2005. The records also do confirm that the petitioner continued until August, 2011 and his right to draw salary for the said period remains protected under the orders of the learned Single Judge. To this extent we find no reason to interfere with with the order passed on the writ petition but what is submitted by learned Senior counsel is that even after having superannuated the petitioner vide order impugned in the writ petition dated 14.09.2011 issued under the signature of the Commandant, the petitioner is yet to receive his superannuation benefits.
In our opinion, since the order put to challenge does not effect the superannuation claim of the petitioner, it cannot be interfered with but while observing thus we are also not posted with the fact as to whether, the petitioner has completed his part of obligation for drawing such benefit by
Patna High Court L.P.A No.2253 of 2015 dt.08-07-2019 3/3 submitting his papers etc. We thus leave it open for the petitioner to approach the concerned authorities with his claim for superannuation benefits and which would be considered and disposed of in accordance with law by the authority concerned and bearing note of the fact that the matter relates to superannuation benefits, let the same be disposed of within 3 months of filing of such representation.
With the observations above, we dispose of this appeal.
(Jyoti Saran, J) ( Partha Sarthy, J) Bibhash AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date 31.07.2019 Transmission Date NA