IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
MOHIT KUMAR SHAH, J.
Lakshaman Kishor Son of Late Basgit Bhagat – Appellant
Versus
The State of Bihar through its Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna – Respondent
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 17738, 17772 of 2019
Decided on : 14-12-2021
Bihar Agricultural and Rural Area Development Agency Act, 1978 -Section 3-Bihar Pension Rules -Pension scheme-grant pension and other pensionary benefits-Agency have been directed to maintain the contributory provident fund accounts of the employees of the Sone Command Area Development Agency.
Finding of the Court :
Since the petitioners are admittedly employees of the Sone Command Area Development Agency, inasmuch as they have been appointed only after constitution of the Sone Command Area Development Agency in the year 1974, as aforesaid, any decision/order/ scheme of the Sone Command Area Development Authority would definitely be not applicable to the petitioners. At this juncture it would also be relevant to refer to the Bihar Contributory Provident Fund Rules, 1948, which postulates applicability of the Bihar Contributory Provident Fund Rules, 1948, to every non-pensionable service of the servant of the Government. Thus, it cannot be said that there is no basis for the petitioners having been taken in the fold of the CPF scheme by the authorities of Sone Command Area Development Agency.
Result: Writ petitions dismissed
JUDGMENT :
The aforesaid two writ petitions have been heard together with consent of the parties since the issues to be adjudicated in the said cases are the same, hence are being disposed off by the present common judgment.
2. The aforesaid two writ petitions have been filed seeking a direction upon the respondents to apply the pension scheme and grant pension and other pensionary benefits in accordance with Bihar Pension Rules to the petitioners.
3. The petitioners of the first case have also prayed for quashing of the order contained in Memo No. 2621 dated 17.09.1983 issued by the Regional Development Commissioner-cum-Chairman, Sone Command Area Development Agency, Patna, whereby and whereunder the concerned authorities of the Agency have been directed to maintain the contributory provident fund accounts of the employees of the Sone Command Area Development Agency.
4. The facts not in dispute are that the petitioners had been appointed on different posts in the year 1975 or thereafter with the Sone Command Area Development Agency, which had subsequently stood merged with the Water and Land Management Institute (herein after referred to as the "WALMI") in the month of September, 2018 and the said employees have also stood superannuated after attaining the age of 60 years. The petitioners are stated to have been paid the contributory provident fund amount, the gratuity amount, group insurance amount and the amount of leave encashment. The only grievance of the petitioners is that they are not being paid pension.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioners Shri Vindhyachal Singh has submitted that the second meeting of the Sone Command Area Development Authority was held on 07.02.1974 at 10:00 A.M. in the office of the Commissioner, Patna Division, Patna and vide Agenda No. 4 it was decided that as far as the service rules of the employees of the Sone Command Area Development Authority is concerned, the following rules shall be made applicable:-
(ii) Bihar T.A. Rules
(iii) G.P. Fund Rules
(iv) Bihar Financial Rules
(v) Bihar Treasury Rules
(vi) Bihar Treasury Code
(vii) Pension Rules
6. The learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that in the said meeting of Sone Command Area Development Authority, even the Chief Secretary of the Government of Bihar and other important high up officials of the Government of Bihar were present. Thus the Sone Command Area Development Authority had taken a conscious decision to make the provisions of the pension rules applicable to its employees, hence the petitioners are entitled to grant of pension. The learned counsel for the petitioners has further submitted that the Chairman, Sone Command Area Development Authority had also issued an order dated 22.06.1974 wherein it was stipulated that the following rules shall be applicable upon its employees:-
(ii) Bihar T.A. Rules
(iii) G.P. Fund Rules
(iv) Bihar Financial Rules
(v) Bihar Treasury Rules
(vi) Bihar Treasury Code
(vii) Pension Rules
7. The learned counsel for the petitioners has also submitted, by referring to the Bihar Agricultural and Rural Area Development Agency Act, 1978 (herein after referred to as the "Act, 1978"), that vide Section 3 thereof, the State Government had constituted agencies for the integrated rural and agricultural development of the command areas of irrigation project and/or such other areas as the State Government may, by notification in the official gazette, specify. Consequently, Sone Command Area Development Agency, Gandak Command Area Development Agency and Koshi Command Area Development Agency were constituted.
8. The learned counsel for the petitioners has also referred to Section 38 & 39 of the aforesaid Act, 1978, which stipulates the Rule/Regulation making power of the State Government and it also provides that the State Government may authorize framing of regulations regarding conditions of services of the officers and servants of the agencies which shall be published in t
I.T.C. Bhadrachalam Paperboards & Anr. vs. Mandal Revenue Officer, A.P. & Ors.
Chandigarh Admn. v. Jagjit Singh [(1995) 1 SCC 745]
Chandra Kishore Jha v. Mahavir Prasad [(1999) 8 SCC 266]
Dhanajaya Reddy v. State of Karnataka [(2001) 4 SCC 9 : 2001 SCC (Cri) 652]
Dipak Babaria vs. State of Gujarat & Ors.
Gujarat Urja Vikas Nigam Ltd. v. Essar Power Ltd. [(2008) 4 SCC 755]
Gursharan Singh v. NDMC [(1996) 2 SCC 459]
Faridabad CT Scan Centre v. D.G. Health Services [(1997) 7 SCC 752]
H.C. Puttaswamy & Ors. vs. Chief Justice of Karnataka High Court
Jagdish Narain Sinha and Anr. vs. The State of Bihar & Anr.
Nazir Ahmad v. King Emperor [(1935-36) 63 IA 372 : (1936) 44 LW 583 : AIR 1936 PC 253]
Pankaj Jain Agencies v. Union of India [(1994) 5 SCC 198
Rao Shiv Bahadur Singh v. State of Vindhya Pradesh [AIR 1954 SC 322 : 1954 Cri LJ 910]
State of Haryana v. Ram Kumar Mann [(1997) 3 SCC 321 : 1997 SCC (L&S) 801]
State of U.P. v. Singhara Singh [AIR 1964 SC 358 : (1964) 1 Cri LJ 263 (2)]
Sammbhu Nath Jha v. Kedar Prasad Sinha [(1972) 1 SCC 573 : 1972 SCC (Cri) 337]
State of Bihar v. Kameshwar Prasad Singh [(2000) 9 SCC 94 : 2000 SCC (L&S) 845]
Union of India v. International Trading Co. [(2003) 5 SCC 437
Pension scheme-petitioners having admittedly received the entire CPF amount along with the due interest without any demur or protest, upon their retirement, they cannot be permitted to retract now at....
The Odisha Development Authorities (Retirement Benefit of the Employees) Rules, 2015 are declared ultra vires, affirming the right of employees appointed prior to 01.01.2005 to receive pension benefi....
Court directed state authorities to expeditiously decide long-pending claims of daily wagers regularized post-2003 for switch to Old GPF/pension scheme from New CPF/NPS, deprecating delay without mer....
The decision to withhold a pension under Rule 43(a) of the Pension Rule should be based on future conduct, and if based on past conduct, Rule 43(b) should be invoked instead.
Employees of an autonomous body functioning as an instrumentality of the State are entitled to coverage under the Old Pension Scheme upon its merger into a government institute, as the denial of such....
An amendment with retrospective operation that takes away a benefit already available to the employee under the existing rule violates the rights guaranteed under Articles 14 and 16 of the Constituti....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.