Narendra Nath Tiwari, J.

1. In this writ application the petitioner has prayed for quashing the Office Order No. 195/2004 issued by Memo No. 669 dated 26.5.2004 (Annexure-3) whereby the respondent No. 4 has passed the order for deduction of Rs. 88,893/-from the petitioners amount of gratuity. The petitioner has also prayed for a direction commanding upon the respondents to pay the entire amount of gratuity, which he is legally entitled to.

2. The facts leading to this writ application are as follows : The petitioner joined the service of the Police Department in the erstwhile State of Bihar as a Constable (O) Wireless on 16.8.1969. He was given promotion to the post of Assistant Sub-Inspector (ASI) in the year 1974 and subsequently to the rank of Sub-Inspector of Police w.e.f. 1.8.1992. After reorganization of the State of Jharkhand, the petitioners service were placed in the Head Quarter of the State of Jharkhand in the year 2001. The petitioner retired on attaining the age of superannuation on 29.2.04. After his retirement, the impugned Office Order No. 195/04 has been issued by Memo No. 669 dated 26.5.04 whereby the respondent No. 4 has directed for deduction of a sum of Rs. 88,893/- from the amount of the petitioners gratuity, denying/disapproving the Reducible Personal Pay (RPP) which was paid to the petitioner during his service period on the basis of the fixation made by the department. According to the petitioner, the respondents have also reduced the amount of his pension on the plea of the said impugned order and fixed the monthly amount of pension at Rs. 8300/-. It has been stated that the petitioner had no role in the fixation of pay or in getting RPP and the pay was fixed by the department and the salary was paid on the said scale from 1996 till his retirement.

3. Two separate counter affidavits have been filed, one by the respondent No. 3 the Deputy Inspector General of Police, Wireless, Jharkhand and another by the respondent No. 5 the Under Secretary, Department of Finance, Jharkhand. The contentions made by the said respondents in both the counter affidavits are almost similar. It has been stated that the State Government employees were granted the benefit of revised central pay scale by the finance department Resolution No. 660 dated 8.2.1999 modified by the corrigendum and issued by Resolution No. 3277, dated 2.6.1999. Schedule V of the said resolution provided the procedure for drawal of pay in the revised scale of pay, according to which the service book along with the Statement-A was to be forwarded by the Drawing and disbursing Officer/Office Head to the competent authority for vetting of the fixation of pay. The concerned authority was authorized to fix the pay of the employees in the revised scale only on provisional basis. But in the petitioners case after provisional pay fixation, the same was not sent to the competent authority for vetting and the petitioner was allowed to draw salary in the revised scale of pay w.e.f. 1.4.1997. The petitioner was promoted to the rank of Sub-Inspector (Operator) on 1.8.1992 while his juniors Suresh Pd. Singh and Ujjair Mallick were promoted to the rank of Sub-Inspector (Operator) on 15.12.1994. The Wireless Organization fixed the pay of the petitioner in the revised pay scale of Rs. 5500-9000 on 17.5.1999 as per the recommendation of 6th pay commission w.e.f. 1.1.1996. By Office Order Nos. 660/99 and 776/99 while fixing the pay of the petitioner, he was allowed Reducible Personal Pay (RPP) of Rs. 700/- w.e.f. 1.1.1996 to protect his pay from the Junior Sub-Inspectors namely Suresh Pd. Singh and Ujjair Mallick. The petitioner was then allotted Jharkhand State while Suresh Pd. Singh and Ujjair Mallick remained in the State of Bihar as per the division made by the State Cadre Advisory Committee. The petitioners statement of pay fixation was sent to the Finance Department, Jharkhand Ranchi for verification as the petitioner was going to retire w.e.f. 29.2.2004. The fi