← Library
Patna High CourtCWJC/4774/2019dismissed

Yogendra Pathak v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2020-06-15Mr. Justice Prabhat Kumar Jha2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.4774 of 2019 ====================================================== Yogendra Pathak S/o late Suryadeep Pathak, R/o Flat No. B-259 Second Flore (Right Side), Chhattarpur Enclave, Chhattarpur South Delhi, P.O. Chhattarpur, P.S. Chhattarpur, District- Delhi- 110074 ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through the Secretary S.C. and S.T. Welfare Department Govt. of Bihar at Patna.

2.

The Secretary, S.C. and S.T. Welfare Department Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 3.

The Collector Nalanda at Nalanda.

4.

The District Welfare Officer Nalanda at Nalanda 5.

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Uma Shankar Singh For the Respondent/s :

Mr.S.K.Mandal (Sc3) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 15-06-2020 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, Mr. S.K. Mandal, SC 3 and Ms. Nivedita Nirvikar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Accountant General, Bihar through Video Conferencing.

The petitioner in this writ petition seeks relief for direction to restore the payment of pension. The petitioner retired from the post of In-charge, District Welfare Officer and he was getting his pension.

Mr. S.K. Mandal, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State submits that the pension of the petitioner was stopped on account of the fact that it was found that due to

Patna High Court CWJC No.4774 of 2019(3) dt.15-06-2020 2/2 negligence of the petitioner, a huge amount of government money through different cheques after cloning was withdrawn for that F.I.R. was lodged but from the order dated 11.04.2019 as contained in Memo No.871, it would appear that the order stopping the payment of pension of the petitioner has already been withdrawn and the petitioner is regularly getting pension. Therefore, the writ petition has become infructuous. Having considered the facts that the order stopping the payment of pension of the petitioner has already been withdrawn by order dated 11.04.2019 as contained in Memo No.871 (Annexure D), this writ petition has become infructuous. Accordingly, the same is dismissed as has become infructuous.

(Prabhat Kumar Jha, J) Harish/- U