Uma Prasad Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
Case at a glance
Outcome
Disposed of
application is disposed of
Judgment
Operative part
.... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Brisketu Sharan Pandey For the Respondent/s : Mr. Anjani Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MIHIR KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 2 01-11-2013 Heard learned counsel for the parties. Having regard to the fact that the Accountant General in its communication dated 25.3.2011 for the reasons recorded therein (Annexure 4) has found the earlier period of services rendered by the petitioner in a recognized school from 17.10.1973 to 22.12.1981 inadmissible for its being taken into account towards the length of service for the purposes of payment of retirement benefit, this on the basis of the precedent relied by the petitioner, as contained in Annexure 6, being an order of the Director, Secondary Education dated 18th May, 2009 as also keeping in view the requirement under Rule 101 of the Bihar Pension Rules permitting condonation of break in service for a Patna High Court CWJC No.18745 of 2013 (2) dt.01-11-2013 2 period upto two years, would direct the Director, Secondary Education, to consider the grievance of the petitioner for computation of his service from 17.10.1973 to 17.2.1983 which has been not recognized by the Accountant General in view of the reasons given in the order dated 25.3.2011. If the Director, Secondary Education is satisfied that the Government Rules and the circulars of the Government with regard to computing the services rendered by a teacher in a recognized institution, who later on leaves his service to serve an unrecognized institution which also is eventually recognized from a prospective date is legally permissible he would recommend the case of the petitioner to the State Government which alone in terms of Rule 101 of Bihar Pension Rules has a power to condone break in service. Whatever decision is to be taken by the Director, Secondary Education and/or the State Government in this regard must be however taken and communicated to the petitioner within a period of six months from the date of receipt of this order. With the aforementioned observation and direction, this application is disposed of. (Mihir Kumar Jha, J) surendra/-
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.