- (1.) HAVING considered the submissions made on behalf, of the respective parties, we are satisfied that sufficient ground has been made out for condoning the delay in filing the appeal. The application for condonation of delay is, accordingly, allowed and the delay of 14 days in filing the appeal is condoned. L.P.A. No. 741 of 2004
(2.) SINCE learned counsel is present on behalf of the respondents, the appeal is taken up on merit. As would appear from the order, passed by the learned Single Judge, the appellant/writ petitioner retired from service on 31st December, 2003. We find that the writ petitioner has prayed that he must be deemed to have continued in service from 31st May, 1966 and his retiral benefits shall be calculated on such basis. Admittedly, the appellant -writ petitioner was appointed to the post of Assistant Controller on 31st May, 1966. On 30th March, 1972, he tendered his resignation and was relieved from his services w.e.f. 6th April, 1972. Thereafter, the appellant -writ petitioner was reappointed by the respondent -Board and he submitted his joining report on, 15th January, 1973. The case of the appellant -writ petitioner is that the period in between the date of his resignation and the date of his re -joining the service on 15th January, 1973 should not be treated as a break in service and having regard to the provisions of Rule 101 of the Bihar Pension Rules, the said break should not effect his continuity in service for the purpose of calculation of retiral benefits from 1966.
(3.) THE learned Single Judge, while taking note of the provisions of Rule 101 of the Bihar Pension Rules, was of the view that since, according to the records, the writ petitioner had been appointed afresh in 1973, the question of continuity in service did not arise. The learned Single Judge treated the subsequent appointment of the writ petitioner as a fresh appointment w.e.f 1973 which did not entail him to get the benefit of the earlier period of service, as claimed by the writ petitioner. On such finding, the learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition.;