JUDGMENT :

The petitioner has approached this Court with a prayer for direction to the respondents to pay the benefit of M.A.C.P. from the date, the petitioner is entitled thereof on completion of 30 years of regular and satisfactory service.

Further prayer has been made to fix the pension after calculating the benefits of M.A.C.P. and also payment of post retiral benefits.

2. As per the factual matrix as stated in the writ petition, the petitioner was appointed as a Sevika in Hindi Uchch Prathmik School, Purani Ranchi vide memo No.7268-73 dated 02.12.1975. Subsequently, the appointment of the petitioner was suspended vide memo No.7843-47 dated 24.12.1975 in want of age proof. This suspension was withdrawn vide memo No.5255-56 dated 22.6.1976, restoring the date of joining as date of initial appointment, after sufficient proof of age was submitted by the petitioner. On 06.09.1977 the petitioner was transferred to Sarvodya Primary School, Ranchi in the pay scale of Rs.155-1-160-2-180 and thereafter the petitioner was again transferred to Govt. Middle School, Krishna Nagar Colony, Ratu Road, Ranchi from where on attaining the age of superannuation, she retired from services.

3. It is further case of the petitioner that she received revised pay scale of Rs.350-5-400 EB-5-425 w.e.f. 01.04.1981 by the then District Superintendent of Education, Ranchi. All through the service of the petitioner has been approved. In the light of the order passed vide memo No.319 dated 30.1.09, petitioner has also been given 1st and 2nd ACP w.e.f. 09.08.1999 and 02.12.1999 respectively and accordingly her pay was fixed. This ACP benefits were also confirmed by the Commissioner, South Chotanagpur. In pursuant to the 6th pay revision, pay scale of the petitioner was revised and her pay was fixed in the pay scale of Rs.5200-20,200/-. Thereafter, vide memo dated 07.01.2010 the Respondent D.S.E., Ranchi has confirmed the services of the petitioner w.e.f. 02.12.1978. The pay scale of the petitioner was provisionally fixed and approved by the District Superintendent of Education, Ranchi. After being eligible for getting the benefits of 3rd MACP, the petitioner made representation before the concerned authorities on different dates but the benefits were never extended. The petitioner after her superannuation on 02.10.2017 made representation for her post reitral benefits but the same was not considered rather the benefits have been withheld by the respondent No.3 on the ground that initial appointment of the petitioner is illegal. The petitioner clarified her stand before the respondents but till date no order has been passed regarding extending the benefits of 3rd M.A.C.P. and also for payment of post retiral benefits as well as fixation of pension in the revised scale and hence the petitioner has been constrained to knock the door of this Court.

4. Mr. Rishikesh Giri, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner strenuously urges that the stand of the respondents is not at all tenable in the eyes of law. Learned Counsel submits that the services of the petitioner have been approved. Benefits of 1st and 2nd M.A.C.P. has been extended. The petitioner continued to work to the satisfaction of the respondent-authorities and her work was praised. Never any allegation was levelled against the petitioner and the appointment was never questioned. It is only after the retirement, respondents have raised the issue of illegal appointment on the ground that at the time of initial appointment, post was neither approved nor sanctioned which is not tenable in the eyes of law. The petitioner is entitled for her benefits which accrued to her after rendering more than 35 years of service.

5. Per contra counter-affidavit has been filed.

6. The respondent-State vehemently opposing the contention of the petitioner submits that upon attaining the age of superannuation and receiving an application for grant of 3rd M.A.C.P. on 11.7.2016 it was found that initial appointment of the petitio