Surendra Pratap Singh v. The State Of Bihar And ORS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.11815 of 2011 ======================================================
1. Surendra Pratap Singh S/O Late Ram Ashish Singh R/O Vill.- Koeilwar (Near Block Office), P.O. And P.S.- Koeilwar, Distt.- Bhojpur .... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State Of Bihar Through The Principal Secretary Health Department, Government Of Bihar, Patna
2. The Commissioner-Cum-Secretary, Health Department, Government Of Bihar, Patna
3. The Director, Health Services, New Secretariat, Patna
4. The Collector, Bhojpur, Ara
5. The Treasury Officer, Bhojpur, Ara
6. The Civil Surgeon Cum Chief Medical Officer, Bhojpur, Ara
7. The Incharge Medical Officer, Primary Health Centre, Sahar, Distt.- Bhojpur
8. The District Provident Fund Officer, Bhojpur
9. The Accountant General, Bihar, R. Block, Patna
10. The Branch Manager, Punjab National Bank, Koilwar, Distt.- Bhojpur. .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ashok Kumar Singh, Advocate. For the Respondent/s : Mr. Dinbandhu Singh GP-9 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE I. A. ANSARI ORAL ORDER 21-01-2015 With the help of this application, made under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner, who retired from the post of Sanitary Inspector in the year 2005, has sought for the issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus to the respondents to pay (a) full pension as decided by Lok Adalat, Bhojpur; (b) rest of the amount of G.P.F.; (c) interest on delayed payment of commutation of pension, and (d) Assured Career Progression benefits.
Heard Mr. Ashok Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the appellant, and Mrs. Namrata Mishra, learned counsel for the
Patna High Court CWJC No.11815 of 2011 (4) dt.21-01-2015 2/2 respondent No.9. Heard also Mr. Kumar Priya Ranjan, learned Counsel for the Punjab National Bank.
The respondent bank has averred in its counter affidavit that the petitioner has already been paid his admissible retiral dues and arrears, and nothing remains due with the respondent Bank.
It is further submitted, on behalf of the petitioner, that some dues are still pending and that the petitioner may be given liberty to approach this Court with an appropriate application, in future, if the petitioner is able to ascertain, if any other amount is required to be paid to him.
To the submissions so made, no objection has been raised by the learned counsel for the respondents. In view of the above and in the interest of justice, the appeal is hereby disposed of as withdrawn with liberty granted to the appellant to approach this Court with appropriate application, in future, if so advised, and also to take recourse to such provisions of law as may be permissible.
(I. A. Ansari, J.) Mkr./- U