Bisnudeo Prasad Yadav v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.19458 of 2018 ====================================================== Bisnudeo Prasad Yadav S/o Ram Vilash Prasad Yadav, R/o Takkipur, P.O.- Belsira, P.S.- Phullidumar, Distt.- Banka.

... ... Petitioner

Versus

1.

The State Of Bihar 2.

The Principal Secretary Panchayati Raj Deptt. Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 3.

The Collector, Banka.

4.

The Deputy Development Commissioner, Banka.

5.

The District Panchayat Raj Officer, Banka.

6.

The Block Development Officer, Katoria, Banka. 7.

The Block Development Officer, Shambhuganj, Banka. 8.

The Block Development Officer, Belhar, Banka. 9.

The Block Development Officer, Barahat, Banka. ... ... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Rajib Ranjan Jha For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Karandeep Kumar, AC to Gp6 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD ORAL ORDER 28-05-2019 Matter has been listed today in the Summer Vacations as the learned Counsel for the petitioner was desirous for consideration of his case during Vacation. The slip for listing was filed pursuant to notice dated 08th May 2019, published prior to the Vacation. The matter is, accordingly taken up for consideration as both parties are present and willing to assist the Court for disposal of the matter.

The petitioner has approached this Court claiming arrears of salary from September 2007.

Patna High Court CWJC No.19458 of 2018(2) dt.28-05-2019 2/2 It is submitted that the petitioner is working as Panchayat Sevak and that for non issuance of last pay certificate and due to non communication of service book to the Block Development Officer, Shambhuganj, payments have not been made to the petitioner. He submits that in this regard he has made a representation, dated 8.2.2018, before respondent No. 5. It is submitted that the petitioner's grievance would be satisfied if this Court directs disposal of the said claim made before respondent No. 5.

Since the claim has to be examined by respondent No. 5, parties agree that keeping this writ petition pending would serve no useful purpose.

Respondent No. 5 is directed to take a final decision on the petitioner's claim, dated 8.2.2018 (Annexure 6/1), within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. This Court would observe that if any dues are found admissible, the same should also be paid within one month thereafter.

The writ application stands disposed of.

(Madhuresh Prasad, J) SNkumar/- U