Hari Shanker Prasad Pathak vs The State of Bihar and Others

Navin Sinha, J.—Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that certain other similarly situated approached this Court in C.W.J.C. No. 14170 of 2004 Reported in 2008 (3) PLJR 356/1621 of 2006 Reported in Ram Swarup Thakur and Others Vs. The State of Bihar to reckon the earlier period of service in the National Discipline Scheme Instructor under the Union of India for grant of time bound promotion. The respondents on 2.12.2009 passed a general order with reference to the Court orders extending the benefit to all who are similarly situated, including the petitioner. His name figures at serial no. 33 of the chart mentioning the dates from which he is entitled to the benefit including the scale. But the actual monetary benefit of the same is still to be received. The next submission is that in the two writ petitions the Court had granted interest @ 5% which may be extended to the petitioner also.

Counsel for the State has opposed the prayer for interest.

The Court upholds the objection of the State. Those who approached the Court for relief in time and those who did not, form separate class. Parity in relief can be denied to them on that classification. The Court declines to grant any relief for interest.

Let the order dated 2.12.2009 in to application to the petitioner be complied in all aspects by payment of actual monetary benefits, including arrears of salary, leave encashment, gratuity etc., arrears of pension and revision of the pension payment order, all to be complied with within a maximum period of three months from the date of receipt and/or production of a copy of this order. The application is disposed.