Satya Deo Singh v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2378 of 2017 ====================================================== Satya Deo Singh, S/o Late Kapil Deo Singh, resident of VillageKhandharpur, P.S. Sandesh, in the District of Bhojpur at Ara. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The state of Bihar through its Principal Secretary, Primary Education, Government of Bihar, Patna.

2. The Director, Primary Education, Government of Bihar, Patna

3. The District Magistrate, Patna

4. The District Programme Officer, (Establishment), Patna

5. The in Charge Headmaster, Rajkiy Adrash Balak Madhya Vidyalaya, Yarpur under Gardanibagh Anchal, Patna.

6. The District Treasury Officer, Patna

7. The Accountant General, Patna .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjeev Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Smt. Binita Singh, SC- 28 Mr. Vivek Anand Amitesh, AC to SC-28 For Accountant General : Mr. Bindhyachal Rai, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPADHYAY ORAL ORDER 15-02-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and State. Today a counter affidavit has been filed by the State indicating therein that the grievance of the petitioner has already been redressed. Para. 6 of the counter affidavit reads as follows: "6. That it is stated and humbly submitted that the deponent has issued the order vide memo no. 2418 dated 20.03.2017 for payment of differential amount of salary of the petitioner for the period from 01.01.1971 to 31.03.1973 with 6% per annum interest in view of Memo no. 822 dated 29.06.2012 of the Principal Secretary, Education Department, Bihar, Patna and the said amount is going to be paid to the petitioner very soon."

Patna High Court CWJC No.2378 of 2017 (3) dt.15-02-2018 2/2 In view of the above, the writ application is disposed of. In case, the petitioner is not fully satisfied with the calculation or any grievance is still subsisting, he may file representation before respondent no.4 within a period of one month from today along with a copy of this order and the respondent no.4 shall examine the claim of the petitioner and if he finds that any of his claim is justified, he may pass appropriate order for redressal of the subsisting grievance of the petitioner within a maximum period of two months from the date of filing of representation. With the aforesaid liberty, the writ application stands disposed of (Anil Kumar Upadhyay, J) Uday/- U