Patna High CourtMJC/1268/2001disposed

Birendra Mishra v. Bihar State Road Transport Cor

2017-05-23The Chief Justice2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.1268 of 2001 =========================================================== Birendra Mishra, son of late Mandar Mishra, resident of village-Janokita, P.P. Paujwara, P.S. Paujara, District-Banka.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. Bihar State Road Transport Corporation through its Managing Director Now Administrator Paribahan Bhawan, Birchand Patel Path, Patna.

2. R. R. Prasad, Managing Director, Bihar State Road Transport Corporation, Paribhahan Bhawan Birchand Patel Path, Patna.

3. Gunnu Ram, Chief Accounts Officer, Bihar State Road Transport Corporation, Paribahan Bhawan Birchand Patel Path, Patna.

4. D. N. Sinha, the Divisional Manager, Dumka, under the Bihar State Road Transport Corporation, Dumka.

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

For the Petitioner/s : None For the Respondent/s : Mr. P.K.Verma, Senior Advocate Ms. Divya Verma, Advocate =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 23-05-2017 On 6th of July, 1998, Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.8006 of 1997 was disposed of directing the respondents, primarily respondent No.3 therein, the Chief Accounts Officer, Bihar State Road Transport Corporation, Patna to consider the representation of the petitioner and take action for its disposal.

Now from the show cause filed by the Chief Accounts Officer and the averments made in paras 5 and 6, it is clear that all the dues admissible and payable to the petitioner have been paid which includes arrears of D.A., arrears of salary, gratuity, CPF, revision of pay after 5th Pay Commission's recommendation, earned leave etc.

Patna High Court MJC No.1268 of 2001 dt.23-05-2017 2/2 That being so, no further action is required to be taken in the matter once the respondents have settled the claim of the petitioner and decided the representation. However, after such settlement, in case the petitioner has any grievance still subsisting, liberty shall be available to the petitioner to assail the same afresh in accordance with law.

With the aforesaid, in the light of the compliance reported by the respondents, the application stands disposed of. (Rajendra Menon, CJ) Sunil/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date 24.05.2017 Transmission Date