Nirmala Devi And ORS v. The Bihar State Electricity Board Now Bihar State Power Holding Company Ltd. And ORS.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.399 of 2013 IN Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 9707 of 1997 ===========================================================

1. Nirmala Devi Wife of late Keshav Jha

2. Santosh Kumar Jha

3. Kumar Aditya Both Sons of late Keshav Jha All Resident of VillageBharatkhand @ Bhatkhand, P.S. Parwata, District Khagaria. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The Bihar State Electricity Board now Bihar Bihar State Power (Holding) Company Ltd. through its Secretary Shri. P.C. Verma, Vidyut Bhawan Bailey Road, Patna.

2. Shri P.K. Rai, Chairman, Bihar State Electricity Board, Now Bihar State Power (Holding) Company Ltd. Vidyut Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna.

3. Shri Shyam Sundar Prasad Shrivastav, General Manager Cum Chief Engineer, Bhagalpur Area Electricity Board, Bhagalpur Now Managing Director, South Bihar Power Distributon Company Ltd. Vidyut Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna.

4. Shri. R.P. Sharma Electrical Executive Engineer, Rural Engineering cum Supply Division, Jamui.

.... .... Opposite Parties =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Jai Kishor Poddar, Advocate For the O.Ps. : Mr. Vinay Kirti Singh, Sr. Adv. =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 31-01-2018 From the supplementary show cause and the averments made in para 4, it is clear that after L.P.A. No.1492 of 2013 was decided, date of birth was fixed as 12.8.2004 and his date of retirement was thereafter treated as 31.8. 2004 and arrears of salary was as 5,66,348/- revised pension at Rs.2,86,480/- and revised gratuity at Rs.1,74,685/- has been paid and even the family pension has been revised and paid to the petitioner. From the aforesaid it is

Patna High Court MJC No.399 of 2013 dt.31-01-2018 2/2 clear that the aforesaid show cause dated 16.10.2017 is not rebutted. In view of the compliance reported, now no further indulgence is called for.

In case the petitioner has any grievance still subsisting with regard to the quantification under any of the above heads after correction of his date of birth, he shall have liberty to claim it afresh in accordance with law.

With the aforesaid liberty granted to the petitioner, this application is disposed of.

(Rajendra Menon, CJ) K.C.jha/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE N/A Uploading Date01-02-2018 Transmission Date