JUDGMENT :

Heard Mr. Madhav Kumar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners in all the cases and respective counsels for the State respondents.

2. The issue involved in all the writ applications are identical, based on similar facts and circumstances, hence all the matters have been heard together and are being disposed of by the common order/judgment with the consent of the respective counsels appearing on behalf of the parties.

3. The petitioners are retired teachers, who superannuated from different Primary Schools prior to 01.01.2016 approached before this Court by filing writ applications seeking quashing of the order dated 02.06.2020 passed by the Principal Secretary, Finance Department whereby the representation filed by the petitioners pursuant to the order dated 13.02.2020 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 3116 of 2020, C.W.J.C. No. 1858 of 2020, C.W.J.C. No. 1854 of 2020, C.W.J.C. No. 1977 of 2020 and C.W.J.C. No. 3027 of 2020 whereby the claim of the petitioners for enhanced retiral and pensionery benefits have been rejected illegally and without assigning any reason.

4. It is not in dispute that the petitioners in the aforesaid writ applications were initially appointed to the post of Assistant Teachers in different Primary Schools/Middle Schools in different Districts of the State of Bihar and after rendering unblemished services, they superannuated prior to 01.01.2016. It is the case of the petitioners that prior to 2016, the pay scale and grade pay of the petitioners was 6500-10500 + 4800/-.

5. On being superannuated, the petitioners have been allowed the admissible post retiral benefits. However, despite 7th Pay Revision with effect from 01.01.2016 when the petitioners have not been allowed the benefit and they have been put to huge loss in pension, as also they suffered loss of seniority on account of procedure followed for notional pay fixation in respect of pension revision benefits, they approached before this Court by filing separate writ applications with regard to their grievances for payment of pensionery benefits on account of 7th Pay revision. All the aforesaid writ applications were heard and disposed of by order dated 13.02.2020 directing the petitioners to file a detailed representation before the respondent nos. 2 and 3 with regard to their grievances and the respondents were directed to look into the matter and disposed of the same by passing reasoned order.

6. In compliance of the aforesaid order of learned coordinate Bench of this Court, the petitioners filed detailed representation before the concerned respondent nos. 2 and 3, which was duly considered by the Principal Secretary, Finance Department, who turned down the claim of the petitioners and rejected the representations by the impugned order dated 02.06.2020, which are impugned in all the respective writ applications.

7. While assailing the impugned order dated 02.06.2020, learned counsel for the petitioners vehemently submits that while passing the impugned order, the respondent Principal Secretary, Finance Department, Government of Bihar, did not take into account the resolution issued by the Finance Department, Government of Bihar, as contained in Memo No. 630 dated 21.01.2010 to revise the pay scale with effect from 01.01.1996, in which the pensioners belonging to up till 31.12.2005 were put in the frame of pay band and grade pay, but at the time of consideration their pre-revised scale to revised pay band and grade pay, no attention was paid to the seniority in the pay band and the grade pay. He further submits that in the same pay band, the senior employees ought to have been given higher pay than that of their junior employees, but such aspect has not been taken into consideration causing anomaly and disparity amongst the pensioners. He also submits that the recommendation made by the 7th Pay Commission for the benefit to regular employee entitled increment during notional period, but neither the Central Government nor the Government