The State Of Bihar And Ors vs Rajiv Kumar Dubey And Anr
2023 Latest Caselaw 202 Patna

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                     Letters Patent Appeal No.1147 of 2018
                                        In
                  Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2157 of 2017
     ======================================================

1. The State Of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Human Resources Development Department, New Secretariat, Patna

2. The Director, Secondary Education, Budh Marg, Patna.

3. The Regional Deputy Director of Education, Tirhut Division, Muzaffarpur.

4. The District Education Officer, East Champaran, Motihari.

... ... Appellant/s Versus

1. Rajiv Kumar Dubey and Anr Son of Harikishore Dubey, resident of Village-

Bhaluahia, P.S.- Adapur, District- East Champaran.

2. Suresh Kumar, son of Basudeo Pandey, resident of village- Belawa, P.S.-

Harpur, District- East Champaran.

... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Appellant/s : Ms. Binita Singh, SC 28 For the Respondent/s : Mr. Siya Ram Shahi, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. B. BAJANTHRI and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. B. BAJANTHRI)

Date : 17-01-2023

Heard learned counsels for the respective parties.

2. Pursuant to the earlier order, learned counsel for the

respondents tried to stress that respondents are entitled to count the

intervening period from the date of dismissal till reinstatement for

the purpose of extending M.A.C.P./A.C.P. benefits. Paragraph No.

31 of the L.P.A. 1492 of 2009 and connected matters decided on

06.01.2010 reads as under:

Patna High Court L.P.A No.1147 of 2018 dt.17-01-2023

"31. Upon completion of this exercise which must

be completed positively within a period of four months of

receipt/production of this order, the competent authority shall

reinstate the concerned respondent writ petitioners who would

fulfill all the aforesaid three conditions as indicated above.

Though the respondent writ petitioners from their date of

reinstatement in terms of the present order would be entitled

for payment of salary but no payment of salary would be

made for the period they have remained out of service. Such

reinstated Respondent writ petitioner would however be given

continuity in service only for the purposes of their post

retirement benefits. In other words, they would not be entitled

for any other financial benefits for the period they have

remained out of service save and except the continuity in

service."

3. Reading of the aforesaid judicial order, it is crystal

clear that the intervening period from the date of

dismissal/termination till reinstatement, the service would be

counted only with reference to post retirement benefits as is

narrated in the aforesaid paragraphs. Therefore, the appellant -

State have made out a prima facie case so as to interfere with the

order of the learned Single Judge dated 29.03.2018 (modified by

an order dated 05.07.2018) passed in C.W.J.C. No. 2157 of 2017

Underline supplied Patna High Court L.P.A No.1147 of 2018 dt.17-01-2023

and they are set aside and decision of the appellant - Department

is affirmed. Accordingly, State L.P.A. stands allowed.

4. Pending I.As, if any, stands disposed off.

5. At this stage, learned counsel for the respondents

submitted that before terminating, some of the respondents, they

have been extended benefit of A.C.P. That shall not be disturbed.

Reading of paragraph No. 31 of the order passed in L.P.A. No.

1492 of 2009 and connected matters, it speaks of only

termination/dismissal and reinstatement. In other words, the

intervening period is not counted for any service benefits other

than post retirement benefits.

(P. B. Bajanthri, J)

( Arun Kumar Jha, J)

GAURAV S./-

AFR/NAFR
CAV DATE
Uploading Date          20.01.2023
Transmission Date