AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Date : 27-08-2026 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents.
Re.: I.A. No. 01 of 2026:
Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner by filing the present interlocutory application seeks amendment in Para-1 of the writ petition by adding additional relief as stated in Para-1 of the present interlocutory application.
Having considered the information contained in the interlocutory application and the grounds mentioned therein and the affidavit, I find that there are sufficient reason to allow the amendment of the prayer as prayed in Para-1 of the writ petition by adding additional relief as stated in Para-1 of the interlocutory application.
I.A. No. 01 of 2026 is allowed.
Re.: C.W.J.C. No. 1106 of 2026
Petitioner has inter alia prayed for following reliefs in the paragraphs No.1 of the writ petition:-
“(I)A writ of certiorari or any other writ or writs be issued for quashing the order contained in memo no.5 Nee go Be (10) 132/2012 Patna, dated 20.07.2012/24.07.2012, Annexure P/10, the order passed by the Principal Secretary Animal and Fish Resource Dept., Govt. of Bihar whereby and whereunder the petitioner claiming all retirement benefits including the due arrears of salary from dated 01.06.1991 to 21.11.1999 and further from 21.11.1999 till the date of superannuation i.e. 31.07.2007 including the retiral dues and pension had been rejected against the provision of law;
(ii)A writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ/writs direction/directions be issued to respondent no.2 to 4 and 5 to make payment as early as possible without furhter delay to the petitioner of the post he had possessed as Travelling Animal Husbandry Officer which the petitioner is legally entitled including Pension, Gratuity, leave encashment, group insurance, GPF/CPF amount arrears and other consequential benefits;
(iii)As a consequence of the first relief on being granted the order passed in W.P. (S) No.1141/2003 dated 22.02.2012 vide Annexure P/1 be directed to be fully implemented which remained abortive or kept in abeyance due to non-payment of retiral dues including pension arising out of direction issued /passed by the Hon’ble Bench Jharkhand;
(iv)Further conseqential relief for giving damages by way of mental torcher caused due to non-payment of retiral dues & regularized pension suffered by the petitioner and his entire family and they should be compensated with the exempla notary cost of rs. 20 Lakhs as prayed for;
(v)Any other relief or reliefs to which the petitioner is entitled under law”"
Thereafter the petitioners filed I.A. No.1 of 2026 for modification of the prayer made in the writ application, inter alia, seeking following relief(s):
“That the present Interlocutory Application is being filed on behalf of the petitioner seeking amendment and/or addition in the relief prayed for in Paragraph No. 1 of the writ petition due to subsequent developments which have taken place after filing of the writ petition. It has become necessary to bring on record the subsequent order/decision passed by the concerned authority for proper adjudication of the iceuninvolved in the present writ petition. Accordingly, the petitioner seeks permission to amend the relief portion of the writ petition, after Clause 1(v) of the writ petition, the following relief may kindly be added:
"(vi)For issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature of Certiorari, quashing the order contained in Memo No. 5 Nee. Go. Bee.(4) 03/2026-228 Nee. Go..Patna dated 13.06.2026/16-06-2026 (vide annexure P/18), passed by the Secretary, Department of Dairy, Fisheries and Animal Resources, Government of Bihar, whereby the claim of the petitioner regarding payment of entire due salary and consequential retiral benefits including pension has been rejected despite the directions issued by this Hon'bleCourt.
Further, for issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the respondents to reconsider the petitioner's claim after taking into consideration all the documents submitted by the petitioner and after removing the objections raised by the Department, in accordance with law."
Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was appointed on the post of Travelling Animal Husbandary Officer, Division Palamu on 17.04.1975 and he was regularly paid salary till 01.06.1991 and from 01.06.1991 to 21.11.1999 for about 9 years, petitioner remained absent from duty due to his illness. The petitioner has claimed that after joining on 21.11.1999, he has produced the medical fitness certificate to the competent authority and the same finds also mentioned in the original service book of the petitioner and other supporting document also supports that absent period from 01.06.1991 to 21.11.1999 is required to be regularized by adjusting the same against the admissible leave under the provision of Bihar Service Code, particularly Rules 149 to 271, 176, 178, 179, 181 to 183 and 185, which empowers the competent authority to commute the period of unauthorized absence into extra ordinary leave accordance with the law. The only option left before the authority having admitted that the petitioner after joining on 21.11.1999 had also received regular salary and the applicable pay scale till the date of his retirement on 31.07.2007. The claim of the petitioner also finds support from order dated 22.02.2012 passed in W.P. (S) No.1141 of 2003, (Annexure P/1), wherein the absence of the petitioner from duty for the above period has already been taken into consideration and pursuant to the said order, already direction was issued to consider the total length of service rendered by the petitioner. Learned counsel further submitted that in a very mechanical manner, the Secretary, Department of Dairy, Fisheries and Animal Resources, Government of Bihar has passed the order dated 13.06.2026/16.06.2026, rejecting the representation of the petitioner and as such, the same is required to be set aside and quashed.
Per contra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State submitted that the Secretary Department of Dairy, Fisheries and Animal Resources, Government of Bihar after considering all the relevant materials has taken a conscious decision, rejecting the claim of the petitioner and there is no infirmity in the order dated 13.06.2026/16.06.2026 and the present writ petition being devoid of any merit, is fit to be dismissed.
Heard the parties.
This Court finds that it is an admitted position that the petitioner has produced the medical fitness certificate, joining report dated 21.11.1999, the original service book required by the Department, and other supporting documents, which are available on the departmental record and it appears that the representation of the petitioner has been rejected by the Secretary, Department of Dairy, Fisheries and Animal Resources, Government of Bihar vide order dated 13.06.2026/16.06.2026, in a mechanical manner, without due consideration of the materials available on record, giving an impression that the decision had been taken with a pre-determined mind to penalise the petitioner.
The Apex Court in case of State of Jharkhand and Ors. Vs. Jitendra Kumar Srivastava and Anr., reported in AIR 2013 SC 3383, has categorically held that gratuity and pension are not the bounties. An employee earns these benefits by dint of his long, continuous, faithful and unblemished service. Relying on the judgment of the Apex Court in cases of D.S. Nakara and Ors. Vs. Union of India, reported in (1983) 1 SCC 305 and Deoki Nandan Prasad Vs. State of Bihar and Ors., reported in (1971) 2 SCC 330, the Apex Court in case of Jitendra Kumar Srivastava (supra) held that pension and pensionary benefits are like private property and the right to property is a constitutional right under Article 300A of the Constitution. The relevant paragraph of the case of Jitendra Kumar Srivastava (supra) is reproduced hereinafter:
“16.The fact remains that there is an imprimatur to the legal principle that the right to receive pension is recognised as a right in “property”. Article 300-A of the Constitution of India reads as under:
“300-A.Persons not to be deprived of property save by
authority of law.—No person shall be deprived of his property save by authority of law.”
Once we proceed on that premise, the answer to the question posed by us in the beginning of this judgment becomes too obvious. A person cannot be deprived of this pension without the authority of law, which is the constitutional mandate enshrined in Article 300-A of the Constitution. It follows that attempt of the appellant to take away a part of pension or gratuity or even leave encashment without any statutory provision and under the umbrage of administrative instruction cannot be countenanced.
17.It hardly needs to be emphasised that the executive instructions are not having statutory character and, therefore, cannot be termed as “law” within the meaning of the aforesaid Article 300-A. On the basis of such a circular, which is not having force of law, the appellant cannot withhold even a part of pension or gratuity. As we noticed above, so far as statutory Rules are concerned, there is no provision for withholding pension or gratuity in the given situation. Had there been any such provision in these Rules, the position would have been different.”
This Court finds that the authorities have only harassed the petitioner and now they without any reason, have taken penal action by not making payment of retiral dues under different heads and fixing the pension of the petitioner. The action of the Secretary is only required to be deprecated, resultant being that he has not considered the service particulars of the petitioner which was required to be taken into account by him in accordance with law. I find that the order contained in Memo No.288 dated 13.06.2026/16.06.2026 (Annexure P/18 to the I.A. No. 1 of 2026) which has been passed without assigning any reason, based on the facts and information, being non-speaking, is quashed and set aside.
Accordingly, the Principal Secretary, Department of Dairy, Fisheries and Animal Resources, Government of Bihar, is directed to call for the service particulars, relating to the petitioner and based on the same, ensure to fix the pension and all the retiral dues under different heads, admissible to him and thereafter the same be paid within a period of six weeks from the date of communication/receipt of a copy of this order in accordance with law.
Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of.