Patna High Court
Anandi Tanti @ Anandi Das,versusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- ANSHUMAN
Holding
The writ petition is disposed, directing the petitioner to file a fresh representation and the Deputy Development Commissioner to pass a reasoned order, with payment to be made if entitlement is confirmed.
Summary
The petitioner, a former Vritya (Anusevak) of the Zila Parishad, retired in 2008 and subsequently received the Additional Cost of Pension (ACP) benefit under earlier regularisation rules. An earlier High Court order (19 July 2017 in CWJC No. 6865 of 2012) had directed that the ACP benefit be paid, but a later order ordered the recovery of that amount. The petitioner filed a writ petition seeking mandamus to compel the State and Panchayati Raj authorities to continue the ACP benefit, return the recovered amount, and declare his entitlement. The court noted that the petitioner's representation filed in 2019 remained pending and therefore directed the petitioner to file a fresh representation within 40 days. It further ordered the Deputy Development Commissioner‑cum‑Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Madhepura, to pass a reasoned order after considering the fresh representation and, if entitlement is established, to make the payment within 90 days. Consequently, the writ petition was disposed with these directions.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to continue receiving the ACP benefit as per the 2017 High Court order.
- Whether the respondents can recover the ACP amount already paid to the petitioner.
- Whether the pending representation filed in 2019 should be considered before granting relief.
Subjects
- writ petition
- mandamus
- ACP benefit
- pension regularisation
- representation
- Zila Parishad
- Bihar
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.4670 of 2022
======================================================
Anandi Tanti @ Anandi Das, son of Late Vikas Tanti, Resident of
Village/Mohalla-Gangjala, Ward No. 17, P.S. Saharsa, Distt-Saharsa.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Principal Secretary, Panchayati Raj, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.
3. The Director, Panchayati Raj Dept, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.
4. The District Magistrate, Madhepura.
5. The Deputy Development Commissioner-cum-Executive Officer, Zila
Parishad, Madhepura.
6. The District Panchayati Raj Officer, Madhepura.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Jha, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Mr. Kameshwar Prasad. Gupta, GP-10
Mr. Anwar Karim, AC to GP-10
For the Zila Parishad : Mr. Mrs. Sunita Kumari, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN
ORAL ORDER
3 13-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned
counsel for the State and learned counsel for the Zila Parishad.
2. The present writ petition has been filed for the
following reliefs:-
(i) For issuance of writ in the
nature of mandamus commanding and
directing the Respondents to pay the benefit
of ACP to the petitioner in the light of order
dated 19.7.2017 passed in C.W.J.C. No.
6865 of 2012 who has already retired from
his services.
Patna High Court CWJC No.4670 of 2022(3) dt.13-01-2026
2/4
(ii) For issuance of Writ further in
the nature of mandamous commanding and
directing the Respondents to return back the
recovery amount of ACP as recovered
earlier after giving benefit of ACP and
comply the order of Hon'ble High Court
dated 19.7.2017 passed in C.W.J.C. No.
6865 of 2012.
(iii) For holding and declaration
that petitioner deserves to get benefit of ACP
as per the Hon'ble High Court's order as
well as return back the recovery amount of
ACP and/Or Pass such other order or orders
as deem fit and proper in the interest of
justice.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner was appointed to the post of Vritya (Anusevak) by
letter no. 120 dated 12.01.1970 on the scale of Rs. 17.50-0.50-
25 and accordingly joined the Zila Parishad, Saharsa.
Subsequently, his service was transferred to the Zila Parishad,
Madhepura, from where he retired in the year 2008. Counsel
further submits that after retirement, the petitioner was paid the
benefit of A.C.P. as per the old rules of regularization of the
department, but thereafter, an order was passed directing the
return of such benefit. Counsel further submits that the
Patna High Court CWJC No.4670 of 2022(3) dt.13-01-2026
3/4
petitioner is a poor employee who was working on the post of
Peon, and in case of granting such benefits, it is the higher
authority which has to take the decision and there is no role of
the petitioner therein. Therefore, counsel submits that the
payment already made may not be recovered and he may be
continued to be extended the said A.C.P. benefit. Counsel relied
upon a judgment passed by this Hon’ble Court in CWJC No.
6865 of 2012, dated 19.07.2017 (Zila Parishad Rohtas
Karamchari Ekai Singh v. The State of Bihar & Ors.).
4. Learned counsel for the Zila Parishad submits that
the representation of the petitioner, which is annexed as
Annexure-4, is still pending. Counsel further submits that the
present writ petition may be disposed of by directing respondent
no. 5 to pass a reasoned and speaking order on the petitioner’s
representation.
5. It transpires to this Court that the petitioner’s
representation was filed in the year 2019 which is pending since
long.
6. As such, the petitioner is hereby directed to file a
fresh representation along with the order passed by this Court
within 40 days from today, and the Deputy Development
Commissioner-cum-Executive Officer, Zila Parishad,
Patna High Court CWJC No.4670 of 2022(3) dt.13-01-2026
4/4
Madhepura (respondent no. 5) is hereby directed to pass a
reasoned and speaking order after considering the case of the
petitioner as well as the factual matrix of the case mentioned
above. If it is found that the petitioner is entitled to the payment,
then such payment is directed to be made within 90 days
thereafter.
7. With the above observations and directions, the
present writ petition stands disposed of.
(Dr. Anshuman, J.)
Aman Kumar/-
U
Checking your session…