Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.10884 of 2019 ======================================================
1. Satish Kumar Singh Son of Late Tapeshwar Narayan Singh R/o Tapraj Kutir, Dr. Rajendra Prasad Lane, Sheikhpura, P.O.-Veterinary College, P.S. Shastri Nagar, District-Patna, the retired Section Officer, Cabinet Secretariat Department, Government of Bihar, Patna
2. Ganesh Dutta Jha S/o Late Sonelal Jha R/o House No. NY/86, behind Jhunjhun Mahal, Janta Road, New Yarpur, P.O.-G.P.O., P.S.-Gardanibag, District-Patna, the retired Joint Director (Administration), State Council of Education Research and Training, Mahendru, Patna ... ... Petitioner/s Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna
2. The Principal Secretary Finance Department, Government of Bihar, Patna
3. The Secretary (Expenditure) Finance Department, Government of Bihar, Patna ... ... Respondent/s ======================================================
with Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 7329 of 2018 ======================================================
1. Braj Kishor Pacheriwala son of Late Raghuber Dayal Pacheriwala, resident of Flat No. 303, Rameshwaram Apartment, Mandal Compound, Boring Road, P.S.- Buddha Colony, District- Patna.
2. Tapan Kumar Chakravarty, son of Late Chandi Charan Chakravarty, resident of Flat No. 201, Keshav Kunj, Behind L.I.C. Building, Fraser Road, District-
Patna.
3. Umesh Roy, son of Late Gulab Roy, resident of J- 142, P.C. Colony, Mohalla- Kankarbagh, District- Patna.
4. Ajay Kumar, son of Shri Oudhesh Prasad, resident of Flat No. 101, Suryananda Apartment, North of Hospito India, Buddha Colony, P.S.-
Buddha Colony, District- Patna.
5. Girija Nand Das, son of Late Srinandan Lal Das, resident of Sri Kripa, 44 Ved Nagar, Rukanpura, Bailey Road, P.O.- B.V. College, P.S.- Rupaspur, District- Patna.
... ... Petitioner/s Versus
1. The State Of Bihar
2. Principal Secretary, Finance Department, Bihar, Patna.
3. Principal Secretary, Commercial Taxes Department, Bihar, Patna.
... ... Respondent/s ======================================================
with Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 7625 of 2018 ======================================================
RAJA RAM son of Late Dhaneshwar Ram, Resident of Mohalla- New Bhikha Chak, Anand Lal Marg, P.O. Anishabad, P.S. Gardanibag, District- Patna, the retired Deputy Secretary, Finance Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
... ... Petitioner/s Versus
1. The State Of Bihar
2. The Principal Secretary, Finance Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
3. The Secretary Expenditure, Finance Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
4. The Principal Secretary, Urban Development and Housing Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
5. The Principal Secretary, General Administration Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
6. The Principal Secretary, Transport Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. 7. The Principal Secretary, Minority Welfare Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
8. The Principal Secretary, Disaster Management Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
9. The Principal Secretary, Rural Development Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
10. The Principal Secretary, Home Police Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
11. The Principal Secretary, Irrigation Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. 12. The Principal Secretary, Education Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
13. The Principal Secretary, Vigilance Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
14. The Principal Secretary, Law Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
15. The Principal Secretary, Revenue and Land Reforms Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
16. The Secretary, Bihar State Election Authority, Bihar, Patna.
17. The Principal Secretary, Registration Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
18. The Principal Secretary, Health Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
19. The Director General of Police, Bihar, Patna.
20. The Principal Secretary, Industries Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. 21. The Principal Secretary, Water Resources Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
22. The Principal Secretary, Cabinet Secretariat Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
... ... Respondent/s ======================================================
with Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 13709 of 2018 ======================================================
Syed Jamil Shaukat son of S.M. Sultan Ahmed Resident of Taj Enclave, Station Road, Phulwarisharif, P.O. and P.S. Phulwarisharif, District - Patna the retired Assistant General Administration Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
... ... Petitioner/s Versus
1. The State Of Bihar
2. The Principal Secretary, Finance Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
3. The Secretary Expenditure, Finance Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
4. The Principal Secretary, General Administration Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
... ... Respondent/s ======================================================
with Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 4801 of 2023 ======================================================
Maheshwar Safi Son of Chhotkan Safi, Resident of Manju Villa, Khemnichak East, Sampatchak, P.S.-Ram Krishna Nagar, District-Patna, Bihar-800027.
... ... Petitioner/s Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Chief Secreary, Government of Bihar, Patna. 2. The Additional Secretary, Finance Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. 3. The Additional Chief Secretary, Education Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
4. The Secretary, (Expenditure) Finance Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
5. The Accountant General, Bihar, Mahalekhakar Bhawan, Beer Chand Patel Path, Patna.
... ... Respondent/s ======================================================
Appearance :
(In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 10884 of 2019)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Abhinav Srivastava, Advocate Ms. Anita Kumari, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. P.K. Shahi, Advocate General (In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 7329 of 2018)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Abhinav Srivastava, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr.Anil Kr.Sinha-GA1 (In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 7625 of 2018)
For the Petitioner/s : Ms. Anita Kumari, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Naman Nayak AC to AAG10 (In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 13709 of 2018)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. S.B.K. Mangalam, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Anuj Kumar AC to GP-24 (In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 4801 of 2023)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Kumar Kaushik, Advocate For the State : Mr.Md. Nadim Seraj ( GP-5)
For the A.G. : Mr. Arun Kumar Arun, Advocate ======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR
ORAL JUDGMENT
(Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE)
Date : 06-03-2024 The writ petitions filed by the Government employees, who retired between 01.01.2016 and 31.03.2017, project a limited cause of payment of Death cum Retirement Gratuity (hereinafter referred to as the ‘DCRG’ in short) at the higher rate subject to the higher limit prescribed as on 31.03.2017. The petitioners claim that there is hostile discrimination insofar as prescription of the date of 31.03.2017; enabling retirees subsequent to that date to get the benefit. The prescription of 31.03.2017, for payment of the higher benefits of DCRG, is without any intelligent differentia, is the short but compelling ground raised, to buttress which reliance is placed on a decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Association of College & University Superannuated Teachers Vs. Union of India in Civil Appeal No. 908 of 2013 delivered on 30.01.2013. 2. We have heard learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri. S.B.K Mangalam, Sri. Abhinav Srivastav & Sri. Kumar Kaushik as also Sri. P.K. Shahi, learned Advocate General for the State.
3. Learned Counsel for the petitioners specifically pointed to Rule-27 of the Bihar Pension Rules, which defines pension as, including gratuity. Gratuity on severance from employment is a one-time measure, and since it is included in the definition of pension, it is not a largesse and is a right entitled to the superannuating employees. The revision having been made effective from 01.01.2016, there is no rationale for not making the enhancement of gratuity also applicable from 01.01.2016. It was argued that the adoption of 01.04.2017 in Annexure-1 is discriminatory, insofar as it does not grant the enhanced DCRG from 01.01.2016, from which date the pension has been revised, though only notionally.
4. Learned Advocate General, while admitting that pension includes gratuity, specifies that both pension and gratuity as enhanced by the State Government would be applicable only from 01.04.2017. The State Government is not bound by the recommendations of the 7th Central Pay Commission which had the date of effect, 01.01.2016. Only since the pay revision of the State Government employees were pending and the State Pay Commission had not published its recommendations, the State Government adopted 7th Central Pay Commission’s recommendations, but, w.e.f 01.04.2017. It is pointed out that the revision of pay effected earlier at the time of 5th and 6th pay revision were similar and though the notional revision was made as on 01.01.1996 and 01.01.2006, the actual monetary benefits were paid only from 01.04.1997 and 01.04.2007. This is the consistent policy of the State Government which has been continued in the present instance at the time of 7th Pay Revision. The consistent policy followed by the Government reckons various factors including financial stringency. The State Government cannot be compared with the Union Government, who has massive resources; which the States lack. It is further pointed out that the application of the pay revision notionally from 01.01.2016 was a benefit conferred, subsequent to the adoption of the date of 01.04.2017. There can be no discrimination claimed on such benefit conferred on the persons, who got notional fixation of pension on the basis of the notional revision effected from 01.01.2016, which notional pay would be treated as the last pay drawn on the date of retirement, even when that date falls between 01.01.2016 and 31.03.2017. It is pointed out that the notional revision does not entitle a higher pension till 01.04.2017. A person retiring on 31.08.2016, would get notional fixation of pay as per the last pay drawn on 31.08.2016. However, the pensionary benefits would be extended only on the pre-revised pay till 31.03.2017. From 01.04.2017, the pension would also be enhanced based on the notional fixation, as per the revision effected notionally from 01.01.2016.
5. We have gone through the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
