Patna High Court - Orders
Bishwanath Pd. Sinha vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 26 March, 2015
Author: Navaniti Prasad Singh
Bench: Navaniti Prasad Singh, Jitendra Mohan Sharma
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Letters Patent Appeal No.1350 of 2012
In
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 10643 of 2012
====================================================
Bishwanath Pd. Sinha, son of late Sant Prasad, resident of Belan Bazar,
P.S. - Kasim Bazar, District - Munger, presently deputed as Driver in the
office of the District Magistrate, Munger.
.... .... Appellant
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. The District Magistrate, Munger.
3. The Deputy Development Commissioner, Munger.
4. The Executive Engineer, Rural Works Department, Works Division,
Kharagpur-Tarapur, District - Munger.
.... .... Respondents
====================================================
CORAM : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAVANITI PRASAD SINGH
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA
ORAL ORDER
(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAVANITI PRASAD SINGH)
2 26-03-2015The appellant, who was the writ petitioner, claims that initially he was taken into work charged establishment in the year 1973. He was subsequently brought in the regular establishment and regularized as a driver in the Rural Works Department under the Executive Engineer, Kharagpur-Tarapur. He claims that along with him several other persons similarly situated were then Patna High Court LPA No.1350 of 2012 (2) dt.26-03-2015 2 deputed to various other departments including DRDA (District Rural Development Agency). He was also deputed in the office of District Magistrate, Munger during period between 09.01.1998 to 26.01.2009 and then 27.01.2009 to 31.05.2012, when he superannuated. These facts are not disputed rather these facts are admitted in the counter affidavit that has been filed on behalf of the respondents no. 2 & 4, being District Magistrate and the Executive Engineer, Rural Works Department, Works Division, Kharagpur, Tarapur, District - Munger.
In view of the aforesaid, the only grievance of the petitioner before learned Single Judge was that for the two periods aforesaid, petitioner/appellant was entitled to the deputation allowance as he was made to work outside his cadre. The learned Single Judge, without even noticing these facts, disposed of the writ petition giving opportunity to the petitioner to return his present cadre and continue. Unfortunately, that was not the dispute. The writ petition was disposed of even without proper appreciation and/or adjudication. Now, that counter affidavit has been filed in this appeal, where it is not in dispute that for the period as noticed above, the appellant/petitioner was sent on Patna High Court LPA No.1350 of 2012 (2) dt.26-03-2015 3 deputation first to DRDA, Munger, and then in the office of District Magistrate, Munger, for the period aforesaid, undisputedly, he was entitled to deputation allowance. Appellant/writ petitioner has also stated that persons, similarly situated, who were put on deputation, have already been paid their deputation allowance. We see no reason why the appellant/writ petitioner is not entitled for the same.
We, accordingly, direct the District Magistrate- cum-Collector, Munger, to pass appropriate orders regarding payment of deputation allowance to the appellant/writ petitioner within a period of two months from the date of production of a copy of this order before him. He would ensure that payment, if any, due is also made within the same period.
With this observation, this Letters Patent Appeal stands disposed of.
(Navaniti Prasad Singh, J.) (Jitendra Mohan Sharma, J.) Rajeev/-
U