Patna High Court
Lakshman Kishore vs The State Of Bihar on 25 June, 2024
Bench: Chief Justice, Harish Kumar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Letters Patent Appeal No. 107 of 2022
In
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.17772 of 2019
======================================================
1. Ram Brat Prasad Son of Late Lal Bihari Rai, Resident of West Lohanipur,
Dadamkuan, Police Station - Kadamkuan, District - Patna.
2. Dinanath Singh, Son of Late Shatrughan Singh, Resident of Village - Parthu,
Police Station - Pipra, District - Patna.
3. Arjun Singh, Son of Late Chandra Singh, Resident of Village - Kamta Chak,
Police Station - Gopalpur, District - Patna.
4. Lakshman Mandal, Son of Late Babu Lal Mandal, Resident of Village -
Shivnagar, Hiro Diara, Police Station - Kashimbazar, District - Munger.
5. Nagesgwar Prasad Sah, Son of Late Banarsi Prasad Sah, Resident of Ward
No. 33, Rajputana Mohalla, Dehri, Police Station - Dehri, District - Rohtas.
6. Amarik Ram, Son of Late Anarik Ram, Resident of Village - Kaler Bulaki
Bigha, Fatehabad, Police Station - Kaler, District - Arwal.
7. Janeshwar Ram, Son of Late Ram Prit Ram, Resident of Village - Kaler,
Police Station - Kaler, District Arwal.
8. Brij Nandan Prasad, Son of Late Brahamdeo Prasad, Resident of Village -
Bishunpur Pakari, Police Station - Beur, District - Patna.
9. Subhash Prasad, Son of Late Nathun Prasad, Resident of Village - Telhara,
Police Station - Telhara, District - Nalanda.
10. Sukhdev Singh, Son of Late Munari Singh, Resident of Village - Budhan
Bigha, Police Station - Kaler, District - Arwal.
11. Suresh Nandan Singh, Son of Late Jhapami Singh, Resident of Village -
Kaler, Fatehabad Sohasa, Police Station - Kaler, District - Arwal.
12. Chanchala Sinha, Wife of Narendra Prasad Singh, Resident of Chandmari
Road, Gali No. 1, Police Station - Kankarbagh (Sampatchak), District -
Patna.
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar, through its Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Principal Secretary, Finance Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.
3. The Finance Commissioner, Government of Bihar, Patna.
4. The Principal Secretary, Water Resources Development Department,
Government of Bihar, Patna.
5. The Director - Cum - Chief Engineer, Water and Land Management Institute
(WALMI), Phulwarisharif, Patna.
6. Munan Singh, Son of Late Kanhaiya Singh, Resident of Village - Shivpur,
Police Station - Bhabhua, District - Bhabhua (Rohtas).
7. Rampravesh Mali, Son of Late Ramkishun Mali, Resident of Village -
Amba, Police Station - Rahui, District - Nalanda.
Patna High Court L.P.A No. 107 of 2022 dt. 03-07-2024
2/8
8. Nasimul Haque, Son of Late Md. Ishaque, Resident of Near Krishi Firm
Sabajpura, Danapur, Police Station - Phulwarisharif, District - Patna.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
with
Letters Patent Appeal No. 92 of 2022
In
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.17738 of 2019
======================================================
1. Lakshman Kishore Son of Late Basgit Bhagat, resident of 194A, Canal
Road, Ahirpurva, P.S.-Ara Muffasil, District-Bhojpur.
2. Nand Lal Ram, son of Late Shiv Narayan Ram, resident of Village-
Gobrachh, P.S.-Bhagwanpur, District-Kaimur (Bhabhua).
3. Radha Krishna Singh, Son of Late Ramayan Prasad Singh, resident of
Village-Gobrachh, P.S.-Bhagwanpur, District-Kaimur (Bhabhua).
4. Sudarshan Ram, Son of Late Balarup Ram, resident of Village-Usari, P.S.-
Mohania, Akorhi, District-Kaimur (Bhabhua).
5. Ramji Prasad, Son of Late Bilat Bind, resident of Village-Ugahanidh, Tola
Baraj, P.S.-Mohania, District-Kaimur (Bhabhua).
6. Triveni Sah, son of Late Janak Sah, resident of Village-Sakari, P.S.-Kudra,
District-Kaimur (Bhabhua).
7. Kishori Ram, Son of Late Bandhu Ram, resident of Village-Usari (Akorhi),
P.S.-Mohania, District-Kaimur (Bhabhua).
8. Satan Prasad, son of Late Ramyad Seth, resident of Mohalla-Patwa Toli,
Ward No. 7, Naya Bhojpur Jadid, P.S.-Dumraon, District-Buxar.
9. Krishna Kumar, son of Late Sheomurat Ram, resident of Village-Darwan,
P.S.-Chainpur, District-Kaimur (Bhabhua).
10. Puranmasi Ram, son of Late Prabhu Ram, resident of Village-Baheri, P.S.-
Bhabhua, District-Kaimur (Bhabhua).
11. Lal Bachan Ram, son of Late Mahangu Ram, resident of Village-Baijnath,
P.S.-Ramgarh, District-Kaimur (Bhabhua).
12. Virendra Singh, son of Late Mukhan Singh, resident of Village-Jakhi Bigha,
P.S.-Dehari (Town), District-Rohtas (Sasaram).
13. Premchand Singh, Son of Late Ganesh Singh, resident of Village-Darwa,
Ward No. 3, P.S.-Mohania, District-Kaimur (Bhabhua).
14. Triloki Nath Singh, son of Late Guput Singh, resident of Village-
Dihbhujaina, P.S.-Chainpur, District-Kaimur (Bhabhua).
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through its Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Principal Secretary, Finance Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.
3. The Finance Commissioner, Government of Bihar, Patna.
Patna High Court L.P.A No. 107 of 2022 dt. 03-07-2024
3/8
4. The Principal Secretary, Water Resources Development Department,
Government of Bihar, Patna.
5. The Director-cum-Chief Engineer, Water and Land Management Institute
(WALMI), Phulwarisharif, Patna.
6. Shiv Prasad, Son of Late Jhoori Prasad, resident of Village-Basani Janso Ki
Madai, Sadalpura, P.S.-Alinagar, District-Chandauli (U.P.).
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
(In Letters Patent Appeal No. 107 of 2022)
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Bindhyachal Singh, Sr. Advocate
For the State : Mr. Anjani Kumar, AAG-4
Mr.Amit Kumar Jha, Advocate
For the WALMI: Mr.Harshvardhan Shivsundaram, Advocate
(In Letters Patent Appeal No. 92 of 2022)
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Bindhyachal Singh, Sr. Advocate
For the State : Mr. Anjani Kumar, AAG-4
Mr.Amit Kumar Jha, Advocate
For the WALMI: Mr.Harshvardhan Shivsundaram, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR
CAV JUDGMENT
(Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE)
Date : 03-07-2024
The appellants, who were the writ petitioners, are
aggrieved by the impugned judgment which rejected the prayer
for pensionary benefits in accordance with the Bihar Pension
Rules, 1950. The appellants are employees of the Sone
Command Area Development Agency (hereinafter referred to as
the Sone CAD Agency) constituted under the Bihar
Agricultural and Rural Area Development Agency Act, 1978
(hereinafter referred to as "BARADA Act"); preceded by an
Ordinance of 1974.
2. We heard learned Senior Counsel for the appellants
Patna High Court L.P.A No. 107 of 2022 dt. 03-07-2024
Shri Bindhyachal Singh and the learned AAG Shri Anjani
Kumar. It is argued on behalf of the appellants that the
regulations made under the BARADA Act were never published
in the Gazette and hence is not applicable. The adoption of the
State Government rules applicable to the State Government
employees by the Sone CADA Agency which was preceded by
the Sone Command Area Development Authority will have to
be given full effect is the contention. Learned AAG, however,
submitted that the petitioners are all retired who are availing the
benefits of Contributory Provident Fund and the issue is fully
covered by the judgment of a Division Bench in L.P.A. No. 11
of 2015 (Ramesh Prasad Singh & Ors. v. The State of Bihar &
Ors.) dated 16.05.2016. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for
the appellants would submit that the said matter is pending
before the Hon'ble Supreme Court.
3. Learned Single Judge, from the writ petition, found
that the petitioners have not only sought for pensionary benefits
in accordance with the Bihar Pension Rules, in one of the writ
petitions they have also challenged the order contained in Memo
No. 2621 dated 17.09.1983 issued by the Regional Development
Commissioner-cum-Chairman of the Sone CAD Agency
wherein the agency was directed to maintain Contributory
Patna High Court L.P.A No. 107 of 2022 dt. 03-07-2024
Provident Fund Account of the employees of the Sone CAD
Agency. We cannot, but notice the all the named appellants are
persons who retired after availing the benefits of the
Contributory Provident Fund and long after their retirement, in
the year 2019 they have approached this Court claiming
pensionary benefits. In fact, even when CWJC No. 21105 of
2013 was filed which led to LPA No. 11 of 2015, the petitioners
were employees of the Sone CAD Agency who had not chosen
to challenge the introduction of Contributory Provident Fund to
the employees of the agency or seek coverage under the Pension
Rules. At the risk of repetition, it has to be noticed that all the
employees have availed the benefits on superannuation. The
claim for pensionary benefits as applicable to the Government
employees, hence cannot be accepted.
4. The learned Single Judge had also considered the
various contentions raised by the petitioners regarding the
adoption of the Service Rules applicable to the Government
employees by the Sone Command Area Development Authority.
Sone Command Area Development Authority was replaced by
Sone CAD Agency under the Ordinance of 1974 and all the
appellants were appointed under the said Agency and not under
the Authority. The agency constituted under the BARADA Act
Patna High Court L.P.A No. 107 of 2022 dt. 03-07-2024
was specifically regulated by the provisions of the statute. The
learned Single Judge based on the aforesaid findings found the
writ petition to be devoid of merit and rejected the same.
5. We see that the very same contentions were
addressed in LPA No. 11 of 2015. Though a challenge is made
to the Hon'ble Supreme Court, admittedly there is no stay
granted and in the present case, as has been noticed above, the
appellants are persons who retired from the Agency after
accepting the Contributory Provident Fund. They have
challenged the introduction of Contributory Provident Fund,
which they have availed and enjoyed, only to claim pensionary
benefits, long after retirement. Hence, we find absolutely no
reason to keep the matter pending till the Hon'ble Supreme
Court decides the issue.
6. We are bound by the Coordinate Bench decision in
LPA No. 11 of 2015. The Bench noticed the relevant provisions
of the statute, specifically Section 39 where the Board can make
regulations only with the previous approval of the State
Government. Though the Sone CAD Authority had adopted
Service Rules including the Pension Rules as applicable to the
employees of the State Government, the employees of the
agency would not be so regulated. With respect to the CADA
Patna High Court L.P.A No. 107 of 2022 dt. 03-07-2024
Agency, a decision was communicated on 10.08.1999 that till
such time the service conditions of the employees of the agency
were not approved by the State Government, the employees of
the agency shall be governed by the rules and regulations of the
State Government. Later to this, the Bihar Agricultural and
Rural Area Development Agency (Service Condition, Conduct,
Discipline, Control and Appeal) Regulation, 2010 was framed,
published in the Government Gazette on 13.07.2011. It was
specifically mandated that all appointments even made prior to
the publication of the regulations shall be governed as per the
service conditions notified. Regulation 132 clearly stipulated the
employees of the agency to be governed by the Provident Fund-
cum-Contributory Pension Scheme from the date of the decision
of the Board which came only on 19.12.2012. Many of the
employees as on the date had retired and, in any event, the
Contributory Pension Scheme is applicable only to those who
were appointed after 2012.
7. We find absolutely no reason to take a different
view from that taken by a Co-ordinate Bench and respectfully
follow the dictum. Herein, the petitioners are also disabled for
reason of the challenge having been raised long after
superannuation; at which point they had availed the benefits of
Patna High Court L.P.A No. 107 of 2022 dt. 03-07-2024
the Contributory Provident Fund. The Letters Patent Appeals
stand rejected.
(K. Vinod Chandran, CJ)
Harish Kumar, J
( Harish Kumar, J)
Anushka/-
AFR/NAFR
CAV DATE 25.06.2024
Uploading Date 04.07.2024
Transmission Date
