Tapan Sen, J.

1. The petitioner, in the instance case, joined the Bihar State Electricity Board and retired for services on 31.3.2001. He has made a grievance that he has not been paid the entire amount towards pension. G.P.F., unutilised leave encashment, over time allowances, gratuity. Group Insurance amount and other lawful tax and legal post retiral dues which have been illegally withheld by the respondents. The petitioner has further prayed for payment of interest with 25% p.a. on all the dues and to pay costs of litigation. He has also made a prayer for issuance of a writ of mandamus commanding upon the respondents not to realise penal rent from him for occupation of Quarter No. 207. Road No.

13. P.T.P.S. Colony. Patratu, Hazaribagh which was allotted to him and in which the petitioner was living and resided till 9.2.2002, The petitioner has also made a prayer for quashing the order dated 11.2.2002 (page 30 of the writ petition) by which the Estate Officer has requested the Accounts Officer to issue last pay certificate to the petitioner only after realisation of house rent in the manner indicated therein. namely rent, standard rent and penal rent. The petitioner has further made a prayer to fix his pay in the revised pay-scale as per recommendation of the 5th Pay Revision Committee w.e.f. 1.4.1996 and also to pay all arrears and/or difference of salary till the date of retirement and thereafter to fix his pension etc. arid pay 15% interest on such lawful and legal dues.

2. In this case on 14.3.2002 when this matter was taken up. the Chairman of B.S.E.B. and Chairman of J.S.E.B. appeared. The Chairman. B.S.E.B. stated that the payment to the pensioners should be made by the respective Board under whose territorial jurisdiction the employees have retired or had retired. The Chairman of the J.S.E.B. however, did not agree with the suggestion given by the Chairman of the B.S.E.B. and stated that those employees who had retired prior to the creation of the J.S.E.B.. his Board. i.e. the J.S.E.B. is not at all liable to pay the retiral dues rather the entire liability is of the B.S.E.B., although they may have lived or retired under the territorial jurisdiction of the J.S.E.B.

3. Therefore, the question that necessarily falls for consideration is as to which of the two Boards is liable to pay the post, retiral dues. Before I proceed to deal with the arguments advanced on behalf of parties, it is necessary to bear in mind that it is now a confirmed and settled principle to hold that pension and other retiral dues are no longer a bounty distributed by the employer. On the contrary, these are valuable rights acquired and are properties in their hands and any delay in settlement and disbursement thereof should be viewed seriously and dealt with severely by imposing penalty in the form of interest. Withholding of quarter allotted, while in service, even after retirement without vacating the same has been viewed to be not a valid ground to withhold the disbursement of terminal benefits. This is also the position with regard to the amount laying in arrears towards Provident Fund which is immune from attachment and deduction or adjustment as against any other dues from the employee. Reference in the aforesaid contention may be made to the case of Gorakhpur University and Ors. v. Dr. Shitla Prasad Nagendra and Ors.,, reported in 2001 AIR SCW 2819: AIR 2001 SC 2433 : 2001 (3) JCR 240 (SC). Having noted the aforesaid principle and law laid down is such matters, it would now be necessary to advert briefly to the submissions made by Mr. Mihir Kumar Jha, learned counsel for the B.S.E.B., so as to come to the conclusion as to which of the two Boards is liable in this case to make the payments.

4. According to Mr. Jha. although the Bihar Reorganisation Act. 2000 came into effect on and from 15.11.2000 but J.S.E.B. was created by the State of Jharkhand on 10.1.2001 vide Annexure-A appended to the counter affidavit, of the respondent Nos. 1. 2