Sudhir Singh v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.8261 of 2021 ====================================================== Sudhir Singh, son of Tinwari Mandal, Resident of village- Chhoti Keshopur, Nalapar, Ward No. 30, P.S.- Jamalpur, District- Munger. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Agricultural Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
2.
The Principal Secretary, Agricultural Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
3.
The Joint Secretary, Agricultural Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. 4.
The Director Agricultural Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. 5.
The District Agriculture Officer, District- Darbhanga. 6.
The Director, Provident Fund Officer, Bihar, Patna. 7.
The District Provident Fund Officer, Darbhanga. 8.
The Accountant General, Patna.
... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Sharda Nand Mishra, Advocate For the Respondent/s :
Mr. Anant Pd. Singh (SC-15) For the Accountant General: Mr. Ram Kinkar Choudhary, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 04-11-2022 The present writ application is being taken up through Video conferencing.
2. Heard Mr. Sharda Nand Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Anant Prasad Singh, learned Standing Counsel No.15 and Mr. Ram Kinkar Choudhary, learned counsel for the Accountant General.
3. The present writ application has been filed seeking a direction upon the respondents for payment of due retiral benefits
2/4 to the petitioner, including the Provident Fund, Earned Leave and other admissible dues, apart from arrears of pension and interest.
4. It is submitted on behalf of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner was appointed on the post of Agriculture Inspector on 29.06.1963 and after serving more than 35 years, he superannuated from service on 21.01.1999 from the post of Agriculture Extension Officer, Ghanshyampur, DistrictDarbhanga. He next submitted that despite lapse of more than 20 years, the entire retiral benefits, including the Provident fund, earned leave and other dues, have not been paid, causing irreparable injuries and loss to the petitioner.
5. On the other hand, Mr. Anant Prasad Singh, learned SC-15, with reference to the averments made in the counter affidavit filed on behalf of respondent nos. 1 to 4, submits that now the grievance of the petitioner has been redressed, inasmuch, as due salary of the petitioner from the month of April 1993 to October 1993 and further from September 1998 to January 1999 was paid to the petitioner and the same has been duly received by him on 25.04.2020, as is evident from the Acquaintance Roll. He further submits that due amount of Group Insurance and earned leave have also been paid to the petitioner and in support of his submission, the acquaintance roll showing payment have been brought on record. He next submitted that so far as the G.P.F.
3/4 amount is concerned, the deduction statements have been provided to the District Provident Fund Officer and on the basis whereof the authority letter no. DB/2022/FP/391 dated 01.06.2022, amounting to the tune of Rs.16,33,571/- along with up-to-date interest thereupon has been sent to the concerned authority for making payment of the authorized amount. He lastly submits that now nothing stands due in favour of the petitioner on account of GPF amount.
6. At this juncture, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the present writ application may be disposed of in view of the statements and the averments made in the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents with liberty to the petitioner to approach the concerned authority, if any, grievance stands subsist for the present.
7. In view of the submissions and the materials available on record, the present writ application is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner that in case any grievance still subsists, he may approach the concerned respondents and the concerned respondent would be under obligation to consider the representation of the petitioner and dispose of the same by a reasoned and speaking order within a period of six weeks from the date of filing of such representation.
4/4
8. Accordingly, the present writ application is disposed of with the aforesaid liberty.
(Harish Kumar, J) uday/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date 09.11.2022 Transmission Date NA