- (1.) Heard counsel for the parties. In the present writ application, the petitioner who retired as a Clerk on 31st August, 2011 under the Directorate of Provident Fund on attaining the age of superannuation, had approached this Court inter alia seeking quashing of letter No. 16 dated 17th March, 2010 (Annexure-5) whereby, the first ACP granted to the petitioner in the scale of Rs. 5,000-8,000/- was reduced to Rs. 4,500-7,000/-. The petitioner had also sought direction upon the respondents to pay the entire post retirement dues of the petitioner such as Gratuity, Leave Encashment, Arrears of due increments, Pension, etc. except GPF and Group Insurance which has been paid, together with interest and statutory interest. The petitioner also made a prayer for direction upon the respondents to count his services since 19th November, 1971 on which date he was appointed as a Clerk/Moharir under Tubewell Division, Sasaram under the Department of Irrigation and Electricity. Consequently, he prayed for the grant of the benefits of second and third ACP under the ACP/MACP scheme with effect from 9th August, 1999 and 1st September, 2008 respectively since he had completed required length of services prior to the due date.
(2.) During the pendency of this writ application, counsel for the petitioner has pointed out that the respondents have reckoned the services of the petitioner from the initial date of his appointment i.e. 19th November, 1971 under the Tubewell Division under the Department of Irrigation and Electricity, Government of Bihar for the purposes of payment of pension, gratuity and other post retirement dues.
(3.) On an earlier date i.e. on 25th October, 2013, this Court after hearing the counsel for the parties, had passed an order giving the respondents further time to file a proper affidavit after reconsideration of the matter. The said order is being reproduced herein below:-- "Heard counsel for the parties. It is the case of the petitioner that he was initially appointed in the State Tubewell Organization in the Minor Irrigation Department under the State of Bihar, in support of the aforesaid contention the service book of the petitioner from his initial date of appointment in the year 1971 has been annexed as Annexure-11 to the supplementary affidavit. He submits that the service of such employees under the Tubewell Organization under the Minor Irrigation Department were, however, handed over to a newly created Bihar State Water Development Corporation by a conscious decision taken by the Irrigation and Electricity Department, Government of Bihar as contained in Government Order No. 844 dated 28.2.1974, Annexure-1 to the writ application. His services were taken in regular establishment under the Corporation w.e.f. 19.11.1981 by the order of the Chairman-cum-Managing Director of the Corporation dated 8.10.1978 as per entries made in the Service Book. It is submitted that as per the said decision, the service condition of the petitioner, under the Tubewell Organization was secured. It is the contention of the petitioner that service of the petitioner was secured under the newly created Corporation as per the policy decision dated 28.2.1974. Some of the employees including the petitioner where services were surplus were, however, later on handed over to the Directorate of Provident Fund for absorption, which was created in the year 1986 by an order dated 18.10.1986 as contained in Annexure-2. It is submitted that the petitioner has retired on 31.8.2011. In the matter of reckoning of the services of the petitioner the respondent-Directorate of Provident Fund, however, has not counted the services of the petitioner prior to his absorption in the Directorate of Provident Fund. This act of the respondent is not proper in the eye of law and has entailed adverse consequences in the matter of post retirement benefits and other service benefits to the petitioner. The respondents, in their counter affidavit, have treated the absorption of the petitioner in the Directorate of Provident Fund as a new appointment and have taken a stand that since the petitioner was in Public Sector Undertaking like the Water Development Corporation, the services of the petitioner for the said period could not be counted. However, it appears that several persons were absorbed in the Directorate of Provident Fund Organization. The petitioner claims to have been working under the Tubewell Organisation under Minor Irrigation Department in the State of Bihar since the year 1971 itself, whose service condition was secured while his services were transferred to the newly created Water Development Corporation where his services were also taken in regular establishment. In such circumstances, it appears that the respondent Directorate have failed to take into account the purport of Annexure-1 and the previous service of the petitioner while taking their stand in discounting his services for the period prior to his absorption in the Directorate of Provident Fund. On the request of the learned counsel for the respondents, therefore, further six weeks time is allowed so that a proper affidavit be filed after reconsideration of the matter. Put up this case in the 2nd week of December, 2013.;