- (1.) All these cases relate to payment of retrial benefits or death benefits of retired employees or wards of the deceased-employees of the State Electricity Board. They claimed for one or other benefits to which they were entitled but nothing has yet been paid by the authority concerned.
(2.) A Bench of this Court in the case of Jhabhu Pandit and Ors. v. Jharkhand State Electricity Board and Ors., 2002 (2) JCR 372 (Jhr), held that the Jharkhand State Electricity Board (hereinafter referred to as the JSEB') shall pay the benefits to those who were posted in the territory of Jharkhand at the time of retirement and the others posted in the territory of the State of Bihar, the Bihar State Electricity Board (hereinafter to be referred to as 'the BSEB') shall pay the benefits.
(3.) The aforesaid judgment of the learned Single Judge has been challenged by both the Boards i.e. JSEB and BSEB in Letters Patent Appeal No. 355 of 2002 and other analogous cases. In the said case, a Division Bench of this Court vide order dated 26th September, 2002 while passed certain directions on the Boards for amicable settlement of issues, such as, apportionment of assets and liabilities etc, also passed following interim order : "Admittedly the writ petitoners-respondents in all these cases are retired employees. They retired either as the employees of the Bihar State Electricity or later on as the employees of the Jharkhand State Electricity Board. The pendency of the ad-judicatory process as mentioned hereinabove is likely to take some time. In the meanwhile, we are of the opinion that these writ petitioners who are the retired employees of the Boards should not be made to suffer on account of non-payment of their retiral dues. Since all the writ petitioners retired while (as on the date of their retirement) they were serving in the territory now constituting Jharkhand state, we direct that the Jharkhand State Electricity Board shall pay the retrial dues to the writ petitioners. This direction is being passed by us on the explicit and specific undertaking given to us today by Mr. Mihir Kumar Jha, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Bihar State Electricity Board that, in the event it is ultimately found that it is the Bihar State Electricity Board, which is responsible and liable to pay the retrial dues to such employees, for the amounts already paid to the writ petitioners, the Bihar State Electricity Board shall reimburse to the Jharkhand State Electricity Board and the future payment shall be made by the Bihar State Electricity Board to such employees. This direction, however, shall not apply to such retired employees who had retired prior to 15.11.2000, the appointed date as per Bihar reorganization Act, 2000, (the date when Jharkhand State came into existence). For such employees, therefore, who retired prior to 15.11.2000 (writ petitioners in these cases) their retrial dues shall be paid by the Bihar State Electricity Board. This direction with respect to these employees (who retired prior to 15.11.2000) is also being passed by us on the specific and explicit undertaking of Mr. A.K. Sinha, learned Advocate General appearing for the Jharkhand State Electricity Board, that if ultimately with respect to such employees Jharkhand State Electricity Board is held liable and responsible to pay the retrial dues, it shall reimburse to the Bihar State Electricity Board for the payments made and shall pay the future retrial dues to such retired employees".;