Radhey Ballabh Singh @ Radha Ballabh Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.5194 of 2022 ====================================================== Radhey Ballabh Singh @ Radha Ballabh Singh, S/o Late Jay Mangal Singh, Resident of Tahal Tola, Dhanaut, P.S. Phulwarishariff, District Patna. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through the Secretary Animal Husbandary and Fisheries Resources Department, Bihar, Patna.

2.

The Director, Animal Husbandary, Bihar, Patna. 3.

The Director Institute of Animal Health and Production, Bihar, Patna. 4.

The District Provident Fund Officer, Patna.

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sunil Kumar, Adv.

Mr. Sanjeeb Kumar Sanju, Adv.

Mr. Bhaskar Sandilya, Adv.

For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Birendra Prasad Singh, Adv.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 20-03-2025 Heard the parties.

2. Notwithstanding the superannuation of the petitioner long back on 29.02.2020 from the post of 4th Grade Employee, Institute of Animal Health and Production, Bihar, Patna, when he has not been extended remaining amount of the G.P.F. and the Leave Encashmement, he preferred the present writ petition.

3. Pursuant to the direction of this Court, a counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondent no.4, wherein it is categorically averred that considering the grievance of the petitioner that his part G.P.F. amount for the period 199495, 1995-96 and 1996-97 has not been calculated in earlier

Patna High Court CWJC No.5194 of 2022(6) dt.20-03-2025 2/2 calculation chart and the same has not been paid to him, the respondent-District Provident Fund Officer, Patna, made a request to the Director Animal Health and Reproduction Institute, Bihar, Patna to provide the G.P.F. relating papers specifically for the period mentioned hereinabove. In response thereto, deduction statement for the period in question has been provided. On the basis thereof, the respondent-District Provident Fund Officer made calculation of the G.P.F. amount, which comes total to the tune of Rs. 35,141/- along with up-todate interest and accordingly authorized the said amount vide authority letter bearing no.644 dated 03.05.2023. So far the claim of the petitioner with respect to Leave Encashment is concerned, it has been made clear by the concerned respondent no.2 in his counter affidavit that the Leave Encashment amount and its difference has already been sanctioned and paid to the petitioner.

4. Considering the submissions advanced and the averments made in the counter affidavit, this Court, prima facie satisfied that the grievance of the petitioner stands settled; the present writ petition stands closed.

(Harish Kumar, J) rohit/- U