JUDGMENT

MOHIT KUMAR SHAH, J.:–

The present writ petition has been filed for directing the Respondent authorities to pay all the retiral benefits as also the consequential benefits to the writ petitioner counting his pensionable service right from his first appointment in the Bihar State Construction Corporation Limited on 15.05.1977 till his retirement on 30.09.2015, after being absorbed as non-medical assistant at Primary Health Centre, Kuthani, under the Muzaffarpur Surgency, under the Health Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

2. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner, pursuant to an advertisement issued in the year 1976 had applied for appointment on the post of typist in the Bihar State Construction Corporation Ltd. and after going through the selection process, he was appointment vide letter dated 28.03.1977, whereafter he submitted his joining on 15.05.1977 in the office of Construction Superintendent (Field), Patna as Typist. Subsequently, the Department of Personnel and Administrative Reforms, Govt. of Bihar, took a policy decision vide resolution dated 5.5.1979 regarding absorption of surplus employees working in various Boards/ Corporations in the State of Bihar in the regular establishment of the Government of Bihar. The case of the petitioner for absorption in the regular establishment was processed in the year 1990 but since the petitioner was not absorbed, he was compelled to file a writ petition bearing CWJC No. 4438 of 1995 and a co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 15.09.1995 granted liberty to the petitioner to file a representation before the Health Commissioner, whereafter the petitioner had filed appropriate representation but the same was rejected vide letter dated 4.9.1996, which was challenged by the petitioner by way of filing yet another writ petition bearing CWJC No. 11141 of 1996 and a co-ordinate Bench of this Court by an order dated 23.11.2010 allowed the said writ petition and quashed the said order dated 4.9.1996 as also directed the Principal Secretary, Personnel and Administrative Reforms Department to consider the case of the petitioner and give suitable directions for absorption of the petitioner. It was only then that the Administrative Reforms Department, vide letter dated 26.07.2011 held that the claim of the petitioner for absorption was bonafide and thereafter, the Principal Secretary, Department of Health, vide letter dated 7.3.2013 had issued direction for absorption of the petitioner on the post of non-medical Assistant and the petitioner was posted under the Muzaffarpur Surgency. The petitioner was thereafter relieved from Bihar State Construction Corporation Ltd. Patna on 20.3.2013, whereafter he had joined at Muzaffarpur Surgency on 23.3.2013. The petitioner then came to be retired on 30.09.2015, however, he has been denied pension on account of not completing the requisite number of years required for grant of pension.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has been in continuous service without any break since his first joining in the Bihar State Construction Corporation Ltd. on 15.05.1977 till his superannuation on 30.09.2015.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has referred to a judgment dated 12.12.2017 rendered by the learned Division Bench of this Court, passed in L.P.A. No. 716 of 2017 (Mukteshwar Prasad Singh & Ors. Vs. The State of Bihar & Ors.) and other analogous cases to contend that in similar cases other incumbents/ retired employees have been directed to be granted pensionary benefits by counting the service period, as rendered by them in the Boards/Corporations/ Public Sector Undertakings, prior to their absorption. In this regard it would be apt to reproduce paragraphs No. 5 to 9 of the said judgment rendered in the case of Mukteshwar Prasad Singh (supra) herein below:—

“5. From the aforesaid legal principles laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, it is clear that the employees identically situa