Patna High Court - Orders
Ram Bachan Singh vs The High Court Of Judicature At Patna ... on 15 May, 2018
Author: Ajay Kumar Tripathi
Bench: Ajay Kumar Tripathi, Nilu Agrawal
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Letters Patent Appeal No.828 of 2017
In
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1955 of 2015
======================================================
Ram Bachan Singh Son of Late Gariban Singh, Resident of Village-
Mapatpur, Post Naon, P.S. Ramgarh, District- Kaimur (Bhabhua) at present
House No. 4 High Court East Gate, Patna.
... ... Appellant
Versus
1. The High Court of Judicature at Patna through the Registrar General, Patna
High Court, Patna.
2. The Registrar, Administration, Patna Court, Patna.
3. The Court Officer, Patna High Court, Patna
4. The Law Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna.
5. The A.R. (Accounts) Patna High Court, Patna.
6. The Accountant General (A & E), Bihar, Patna.
... ... Respondents
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Rajendra Kumar Jain
For the Respondent/s : Mr.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI
and
HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. NILU AGRAWAL
ORAL ORDER
(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI)
7 15-05-2018Heard counsel for the appellant.
The appeal is dismissed. No interference is warranted with the impugned order dated 18.01.2017 passed by the learned single Judge in C.W.J.C. No. 1955 of 2015.
Counsel for the appellant tries to place reliance on a decision dated 26.08.2013 passed by a Bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in S.L.A. (Civil) No. 27262 of 2013 where the Hon'ble Apex Court had given direction to consider the past service even of a casual labourer for calculation of benefit of pension.
Patna High Court LPA No.828 of 2017(7) dt.15-05-2018 2/2 With due respect to the counsel for the appellant, the factual matrix and the legal proposition, which has been dealt with by the Hon'ble Apex Court, has no applicability to the facts and situation of the present case. A daily wager having been substantially appointed subsequently cannot demand and beget benefit of past service as a daily wager in the High Court for the purpose of payment of pension.
Appeal, therefore, stands dismissed being devoid of merit.
(Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J) ( Nilu Agrawal, J) Pawan/-
U