Patna High Court - Orders
Dr. Nagweshwer Narain Shahi vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 20 July, 2016
Author: Sharan Singh
Bench: Sharan Singh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.21849 of 2012
======================================================
1. Dr. Nageshwar Narain Shahi S/O Hari Madhav Prasad Shahi R/O
Mohalla-Ujjain Tola, Duck Bunglow Road, Bettiah, P.S.-Sadar, Distt-West
Champaran
.... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State Of Bihar Through Its Principal Secretary, Department Of
Health And Family Welfare, Patna
2. The Director-In-Chief Health Services, Govt. Of Bihar, Patna
3. The Under Secretary, Department Of Health , Govt. Of Bihar, Patna
4. The Civil Surgeon Cum Chief Medical Officer, Saran At Chapra
5. The Accountant Genral , Govt. Of Bihar, Patna
.... .... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/ : Mr. Mukesh Kant
For the State : Mr. Sunil Kumar Mandal, SC 24
Mr. Arjun Prasad, AC to SC 24
For Accountant General : Mr. Raj Nandan Prasad
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHAKRADHARI
SHARAN SINGH
ORAL ORDER
3 20-07-2016Heard learned Counsel for the parties concerned.
The petitioner was appointed as Civil Assistant Surgeon in Bihar Health Services, whereupon he had joined on 21.03.1979. His services were confirmed subsequently. He continued as such till 01.02.1990 with effect from which his resignation was accepted. There is no dispute in the fact to this extent.
It is the contention of the petitioner that the petitioner is entitled to pro-rata pension and gratuity, Patna High Court CWJC No.21849 of 2012 (3) dt.20-07-2016 2/3 computing the period of his actual service, i.e., from 21.03.1979 to 01.02.1990.
Rule 101 (a) of the Bihar Pension Rules lays down that resignation from public service by a Government servant shall entail forfeiture of past services. Rule 101 (a) of the Bihar Pension Rules is relevant and is being extracted herein below:-
101. (a) Resignation of the public service or dismissal or removal from it for misconduct, insolvency, inefficiency not due to age, or failure to pass a prescribed examination entails forfeiture of past service.
The petitioner has relied upon single Bench decisions of this Court, in the cases of Dr. (Smt.) Shahida Hassan v. State of Bihar and Others, reported in 2004 (1) PLJR 318 and Tapan Kumar Chatterjee v. State of Bihar and Others, reported in 1998 (1) PLJR 707.
The language of Rule 101 (a) of the Bihar Pension Rules is unambiguous and it clearly lays down that if a Government servant resigns from public service, forfeiture of past service shall be the consequence. The decisions relied upon by the petitioner, in the cases of Dr. (Smt.) Shahida Hassan (supra) and Tapan Kumar Chatterjee (supra), have been overruled by a Division Patna High Court CWJC No.21849 of 2012 (3) dt.20-07-2016 3/3 Bench of this Court, in the case of State of Bihar v. Dr. (Smt.) Shahida Hassan, reported in 2010 (2) PLJR 189. I do not find any merit in this application. This application is accordingly dismissed.
It is, however, made clear that Rule 101 (a) of the Bihar Pension Rules provides for forfeiture of pension only, which includes gratuity. If other post retiral dues, like General Provident Fund amount and Group Insurance Scheme amount, have not been paid to the petitioner, the State-respondents will be required to pay the said amount, within a period of three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.
(Chakradhari Sharan Singh, J.) Prabhakar Anand/-
U √ T X