Shiv Nandan Paswan v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.6475 of 2024 ====================================================== Shiv Nandan Paswan Son of Late Lachhu Paswan, Resident of villageAlloudiya Saray @ Sari, P.O.- Tiuri, P.S.- Manpur, District-Nalanda. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through its Principal Secretary to Govt., Public Health Engineering Department, Bisheshwaraiya Bhavan, Bailey Road, Patna. 2.

The Engineer In Chief Cum Special Secretary Public Health Engineering Department, Bisheshwaraiya Bhavan, Bailey Road, Patna. 3.

The Chief Engineer (Mechanical) Public Health Engineering Department, Bisheshwaraiya Bhavan, Bailey Road, Patna.

4.

The Superintending Engineer, Public Health Mechanical Circle, Patna. 5.

The Executive Engineer, Public Health Mechanical Division Patna. 6.

The Accountant General Bihar, Veerchand Patel Marg, Patna. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Amit Anand, Adv.

Mr.Lalan Kr. Singh, Adv.

For the Respondent/s :

Mr.Hitesh Suma, AC to SC-13 For the AG, Bihar :

Mrs.Ritika Rani, Adv.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH ORAL ORDER 26-04-2024

1. The present writ petition has been filed seeking the following relief(s):- "1) That by this writ application the petitioner seeks indulgence of this Hon'ble Court to consider and grant all the retiral benefits after computing the entire length of service commencing from work charge establishment to the date of absorption in permanent establishment i.e. 1988 to 30.11.2006 for the purpose of full pensionable service, Revision of Pension, Gratuity, Leave Encashment and G.P.F. in the light of the same issue has been decided recently

Patna High Court CWJC No.6475 of 2024(2) dt.26-04-2024 2/2 by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Uday Pratap Thakur and others and analogous cases on 28.04.2023 and also decided the Seela Devi case and the petitioner further pray to grant all consequential benefits of service in the light of the Hon'ble Apex Court and the case of Sheela Devi."

2. After some arguments, the learned counsel for the petitioner seeks not to press the present writ petition, however, seeks liberty on behalf of the petitioner to approach the respondent-authorities for redressal of his aforesaid grievances. Liberty so sought is granted.

3. The writ petition stands dismissed as not pressed. (Mohit Kumar Shah, J) sonal/- U