R.K. Merathia, J.-Heard the parties at length.

2. This writ petition has been filed for quashing the order dated 27.3.2004 passed by the respondent NO.2 (Annexure-5) rejecting petitioner's representation and confirming the order dated 16.2.2000 passed by the Finance Commissioner, Bihar, Patna; and for directing the respondents to pay gratuity to be calculated by adding 97% Dearness Allowance (DA), pension on the basis of adding 295% DA, interest on the provident fund amount and medical allowance at par with the Government servant.

3. Mr. A.K. Sahani, learned counsel, appearing for the petitioner, submitted as follows. Petitioner is an association representing retired officers and servants of Ranchi Municipal Corporation (Corporation for short). After retirement, it’s members are entitled to leave salary, gratuity, provident fund and medical allowance, etc. In view of the resolution under Memo No. 663 dated 3.2.1981 and Memo No. 1323 dated 11.4.1991 issued by the Urban Development and Housing Department, Government of Bihar the retired employees of the Corporation are to be treated at par with the State Government employees in the matter of payment of retiral benefits. He also relied on Rules 43 and 44 of Chapter VII of the Patna Municipal Corporation Officers & Servants Pension Rules, 1986 (Pension Rules, 1986 for short).

4. Counsel for the respondents supported the impugned order. They further submitted that this writ petition is not maintainable and is barred by res judicata in view of the order/judgment dated 23.7.1997 passed in C.W.J.C. 820 of 1997(R) and dated 23.9.2002 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 1473 of 2000(R), and moreover petitioner is guilty of suppressing the said order dated 23.7.1997 passed in C.W.J.C. 820 of 1997(R).

5. The questions are whether this writ petition is maintainable, in view of the earlier orders of this Court; and whether the directions sought for, can be issued in this writ petition? The answer would be in the negative, for the following reasons.

6. It appears that one Aditya Narayan Sahu, a retired employee of the Corporation filed a writ petition which was registered as C.W.J.C. No. 820 of 1997(R) for payment of his retiral benefits. The aforesaid resolution dated 11.4.1991 was relied. It was agreed that the matter may be referred to the Finance Commissioner, who will take a final decision in the matter, and the same will be binding on the parties. The concluding portion of the order dated 23.7.1997 disposing of the said writ petition in general terms, reads as follows:- .

"Accordingly, let this dispute as to whether the employees of the Corporation be treated at par with the employees of the State Government for all purposes including the payment of retirement benefits, be referred to the Finance Commissioner, Government of Bihar for taking a final decision on the issue, who will take a final decision in the matter within six weeks from the date of filing of the relevant documents by the parties."

7. Accordingly, the Finance Commissioner, Bihar took a decision on 16.2.2000 after taking into consideration the provisions of Patna Municipal Corporation Act, the Pension Rules, 1986; the Gratuity Rules, 1983; and the following letter/resolutions of the Urban Development Department-Resolution No. 2101 dated 2.7.1991; Memo No. 1323 dated 11.4.1991, and Memo No. 663 dated 3.2.1981 relied by the petitioner; Memo No. 1935 dated 3.4.1979/4.5.1979; Memo no. 2655 dated 21.9.1993; and Notification No. 3058 dated 1.7.1928. The Finance Commissioner, inter alia, concluded as follows:- the Local Bodies were constituted under different Statutes and they were not equivalent to the Government Department and accordingly the employees of the Corporation are not the State Government employees. The decisions taken by State Government with regard to the service conditions and other benefits of it's employees do not become automatically applicable to the employees of the Local Bodies, unless such decisions are adopt