R.M.Prasad, J.

1. As in all these writ petitions, grievance of the petitioners relates to pensionary dues and the question involved is common, with consent of the parties, they have been heard together for final disposal.

2. In all these writ petitions, petitioners superannuated from the service of the Bihar State Electricity Board, hereinafter referred to as B.S.E.B. before creation of Jharkhand State Electricity Board, hereinafter referred to as J.S.E.B. from the places presently falling in the territorial jurisdiction of Jharkhand State Electricity Board except in the case of petitioners in CWJC Nos. 10476 and 10524 of 2002, who superannuated after creation of J.S.E.B., but from the area presently falling in the territorial jurisdiction of the B.S.E.B. All the petitioners are aggrieved, some on account of non-payment of retiral dues at all and some on account of non-payment of arrears of their retiral dues in the revised scale. Petitioners of C.W.J.C. No. 10476 and 10524 of 2002 are getting their pension in the revised scale, but, they are aggrieved only on acpount of non-payment of their arrears in the revised scale.

3. I consider it useful to quote the date of retirement and place of posting of the petitioners hereinbelow :

4. A counter-affidavit has been filed on behalf of B.S.E.B. and its officials (Respondent Nos. 1 to 3). But, despite service of notice, no counter-affidavit has been filed by any other Respondent inpluding Government of India and Jharkhand State Electricity Board. The Respondents, however, do not dispute that the petitioners having retired from the service are entitled for payment of retiral dues.

5. The only issue raised by the B.S.E.B. is that so long apportionment of liability is not finally determined, they are unable to make payment of retirardues Of the employees including the petitioners, who retired from the place presently falling within the territorial jurisdiction of Jharkhand State Electricity Board and even the arrears on account of revision to the employees who retired from the place presently falling in the territorial jurisdiction of Bihar State Electricity Board.

6. It has been submitted by Mr. Jha, learned Counsel for the B.S.E.B. that if a comparative study is made of the revenue collection and expenditure by erstwhile B.S.E.B. and corresponding revenue collection including arrears standing before creation of J.S.E.B. which now is being collected by J.S.E.B. from the area falling in their territorial jurisdiction, it would be manifest that there has been sharp fall in the revenue in the Bihar State Electricity Board whereas J.S.E.B. has been given right to collect huge amount of arrears standing before its creation from the area falling in their territory. He submitted that the past liabilities of the erstwhile B.S.E.B. even in regard to pensionary benefits and arrears have to be shared between them and the J.S.E.B. which having not been done so far and this has also led to acute financial crunch in the B.S.E.B. which is unable to meet even the present liability.

7. According to Mr. Shivendra Kishore, learned Counsel appearing for Jharkhand State Electricity Board these writ petitioners are premature as adjudication process with respect to apportionment Is yet pending consideration before the Central Government. However, he, further, submitted that in view of the order dated 26-9-2002 passed by the Division Bench of Jharkhand High Court in L.P.A. No. 355 of 2002 and analogous cases, it is the liability of Bihar State Electricity Board to pay the retiral dues of the petitioners, who admittedly retired prior to 15-11-2000 subject to determination of the liability upon which the respective Board will have to reimburse to the other Board.

8. Learned Counsel for the Bihar State Electricity Board, in reply, has submitted that the direction given by the Division Bench and the undertaking recorded therein was confined to the writ petitioners and not for any other retired employees as