← Library
Patna High CourtCWJC/2336/2013disposed

Ramauttar Mistry v. The Bihar State Electricity Board And ORS

2016-05-06Mr. Justice Samarendra Pratap Singh2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2336 of 2013 ====================================================== Ramauttar Mistry Son Of Late Nathuni Mistry Resident Of Village -Bhane Bigha, P.S. - Makhdumpur, District - Jehanabad .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The Bihar State Electricity Board , Through Its Chairman, Vidhyut Bhawan, Jawahar Lal Nehru Marg (Bailey Road), Patna

2. The Secretary, Bihar State Electricity Board, Vidhyut Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna

3. The Controller, Finance, Bihar State Electricity Board, Vidhyut Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna

4. The Director Of Accounts (Sevo Utra Lav Awam Vawisyanidhi), Vidhyut Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna

5. The Director Of Accounts, Head Quarter, Bihar State Electricity Board, Vidhyut Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna

6. The General Manager-Cum-Chief Engineer, Bihar State Electricity Bord, Mangles Road, Patna

7. The Electrical Executive Engineer, Bihar State Electricity Board, Masaudi Division, Masaudi , Patna .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Amrendra Kumar Sinha No.-1 For the Respondent/s : Mr. Vinay Kirti Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SAMARENDRA PRATAP SINGH ORAL ORDER 06-05-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

The present writ petition has been preferred for direction to the respondents to make payment of the retiral dues of the petitioner.

Four counter affidavits have been filed on behalf of the respondents.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

Patna High Court CWJC No.2336 of 2013 (9) dt.06-05-2016 2/2 petitioner has claimed for payment of overtime for the period w.e.f. 1997 to 31.08.2012.

In the counter affidavit the respondents have stated that all admitted dues of the petitioner has been paid, which the petitioner does not dispute.

In case the petitioner has still grievance, it would be open for him to approach the appropriate authority with details. In case, such application is filed, the same would be disposed of within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

(Samarendra Pratap Singh, J) AnilKrSinha/- U