JUDGMENT
Mihir Kumar Jha, J.
Page 0109
1. In this case, pursuant to the earlier order, dated 26.07.2007, the Director. Primary Education and the Director, Administration of the Education Department are present. Similarly, the District Education Officer, Siwan and the District Provident Fund Officers. Siwan and Muzaffarpur are present.
2. From the counter affidavits filed today, two things have emerged, namely, that the petitioner’s period of suspension i.e. 23.07.1993 to 04.07.2000 has been now counted towards qualifying period of his pension and accordingly order for payment of revised pension payment and gratuity payment were issued as contained in Annexures A & B to the supplementary counter affidavit filed on behalf of respondents 1, 2 & 3.
3. Counsel for the petitioner, however, submits that on account of pay-fixation, his client would be entitled for some more amount of pension and/or gratuity.
4. In view of the fact that now the major portion of the grievance of the petitioner by computing the aforementioned period of his service as qualifying service for calculation of pension has been redressed, it is expected that if the petitioner files a representation along with a copy of this order for revision of his pension in the revised pay scale, the same shall receive the attention of the competent authority and a reasoned order on the same would be passed within a period of eight weeks from the date of filing of the representation.
5. It goes without saying that in case any further amount hitherto towards arrears of pension, balance of gratuity and/or any other retirement benefits becomes payable to the petitioner, the same shall be paid to her within a period of next eight weeks.
6. By the another supplementary counter affidavit on behalf of respondents 1, 2 & 3, the Director. Primary Education has sought to convey that in compliance of the order of this Court, he has enquired into the matter and fixed the responsibility of delaying in payment of pension and/or depriving the petitioner from his qualifying service on one Shri Awadh Kishore Kapri, the then Principal of the Primary Teachers Training College, Patahi in the district of Muzaffarpur. He has also communicated a memo of charge contained in letter No. 821, dated 1.8.2007 by which the Department has proposed to initiate a departmental proceeding against the said Officer, Shri Kapri. The Director, Primary Education says that the Director Page 0110 Administration has been appointed as the Enquiry Officer in the said departmental proceeding.
7. It is expected that such departmental proceeding must be expedited and in any event a final order in the same must be passed within a period of six months from today and a report of the said final order is communicated to the Registry of this Court. The Registry thereafter will place the said report for perusal of this Court.
8. In view of the fact that now the original grievance of the petitioner as raised in the writ application stands redressed, this writ application is being disposed of in light of the aforementioned observations and directions.
9. Let it be noted that by the earlier order, the Secretary, Human Resources Development Department was directed to be personally present before this Court but from his letter No. 517/C, dated 02.08.2007 it appears that he has been invited and is busy in attending a conference at Lucknow. In such a situation the personal appearance of the Secretary, Human Resources Development Department is exempted. In this case, the personal appearance of all other officers who were directed to be personally present before this Court is also exempted.
10. In course of examination of this case, one thing which has transpired is that there is unusual delay in finalization of payment of retirement benefits of the employees of the State Government and particularly in Education Department. The parties agree and so do their Counsel that whatever amount is admissible to a retired employee can definitely be paid to him at least to the extent as much as law permits. It is true that under the Bihar Pension Rules, the full pension could only be paid after authorization made by the Accountant General. Nonetheless, the same Bihar Pension Rules provides that in any event for any reason a final pension can not be sanctioned/authorised and paid the pensioner has to be given 90 per cent of the amount by way of provisional pension. There is a similar provision with regard to the calculation of G.P.F., six months prior to the retirement. There is similar provision even in calculating the amount of Group Insurance Scheme.
11. In that view of the matter the Director, Primary Education and the Director, Administration of the Human Resources Development Department assures this Court that henceforth they will make their best efforts to ensure that each and every employee of the Education Department retiring either from the Headquarter or from the field Office will be paid his provisional pension and gratuity and other amount admissible on the date of his retirement. Thereafter, the balance amount which can not be paid for some administrative reasons will be paid in next six months.
12. It is hoped that the aforesaid assurance given by the authorities will be implemented in its true spirit and the plight of the poor pensioners will at least partly improve. The respondents are expected to ensure the payment of the admitted amount of retirement benefits so that when their payment of salary is stopped on account of their retirement from service, they may survive till they are paid their full and final admissible amount of retirement benefits.
13. Let a copy of this order be given to Mr. Shyam Kishore Sharma, learned Government Advocate V for its immediate communication to the authorities concerned.
