Patna High CourtCWJC/14800/2014disposed

Ranjan Kumar v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2016-01-30Mr. Justice Rakesh Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.14800 of 2014 ====================================================== Ranjan Kumar son of Late Nagendra Prasad resident of Mohalla - Suratganj (B.N. Studio), Ward No. 14, P.S. - Madhubani (Town Thana), District - Madhubani.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through Principal Secretary, Department of Health, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

2. The Chief General Manager, Zonal Head Office, S.B.I. Judges Court Road, Patna (C.P.P.C. Unit), near Gandhi Maidan.

3. The Branch Manager, S.B.I. Main Branch, Red Cross Building, Madhubani.

4. The Treasury Officer, District of Madhubani.

5. The Civil Surgeon cum Chief Medical Officer, Madhubani.

6. The Accountant General, Bihar, Patna

7. The Additional Secretary, Department of Health, Government of Bihar, Patna.

8. The Director in Chief, Health Services, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Dhirendra Kumar Singh For the Respondent/s :

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 30-01-2016 Heard Sri Satish Chandra Jha, learned counsel, who was assisted by Sri Dhirendra Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned AC to SC No. 6, Sri Rakesh Kumar Singh, learned counsel who has appeared on behalf of the respondent no. 2 and 3 as well as Sri Bindhayachal Rai, learned counsel for the Accountant General, Bihar.

In the present writ petition the petitioner has only made a prayer for directing the respondent/ Bank for crediting the revised / enhanced pension amount in view of P.P.O. dated

Patna High Court CWJC No.14800 of 2014 (2) dt.30-01-2016 2/2 13.7.2001 which was sent to the Bank on 9.12.2011. Sri Rakesh Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the respondent no. 2 and 3 submits that as per authorization enhanced pension has already been calculated and credited to the account of the petitioner and same was communicated to the petitioner. In view of the facts and circumstances, there is no need to keep the matter pending.

The writ petition stands disposed of.

If the petitioner feels aggrieved with the calculation, he would be at liberty to avail appropriate remedy. (Rakesh Kumar, J) Praful/- U