Patna High CourtCWJC/4947/2014dismissed

Rajendra Institute Of Education And Social Welfare v. The Union Of India And ORS

2015-08-31Mr. Justice Rakesh Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.4947 of 2014 ====================================================== Rajendra Institute of Education and Social Welfare, Halimpur, DistrictSitamarhi through its Registrar, Jitendra Narayan Sinha, son of Sri Bhudeo Narayan Sinha, resident of Halimpur, P.S. Mejarganj, District- Sitamarhi .... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The Union of India through the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Bihar, 6- Serpentine Road, Patna-800001

2. Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner, Muzaffarpur

3. The Recovery Officer, Employee Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions, Bihar, Patna

4. The Recovery Officer, Office of the Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner, Muzaffarpur .... .... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Mishra For the Respondent/s : Mr.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 31-08-2015 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the Respondent/ Employees Provident Fund Organisation.

The petitioner after loss of his claim before this Court against order of assessment, review as well as order of the appellate court has again approached this Court by filing the present writ petition with a plea to direct the Respondents to consider his representation dated 30.10.2012 for re-assessing the amount payable by the petitioner.

It is evident that earlier after the order of assessment, rejection of review petition as well as rejection of appeal by the appellate authority, the petitioner had approached this Court by

Patna High Court CWJC No.4947 of 2014 (6) dt.31-08-2015 2/2 filing C.W.J.C. No.5070 of 2011, which was dismissed by a Bench of this Court on 10.10.2012 considering all the facts and circumstances. Once the writ court has already adjudicated on the issue, there is no point to entertain a separate writ petition. The writ petition stands dismissed.

(Rakesh Kumar, J) NKS/- U