Patna High CourtCWJC/15005/2006disposed

Ram Prahlad Singh v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2015-08-24Mr. Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 15005 of 2006 ====================================================== Ram Prahlad Singh, Son of Late Rama Singh, Village- Bharpura, P.O. & P.S.-Sonepur, District- Saran at present residing at Mohalla- Mahatma Gandhi Nagar, Anand Path, P.O.- Lohiya Nagar, P.S. Agamkuan, DistrictPatna. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. Bihar State Co-operative Bank Limited Ashok Raj Path, Patna-4 through its Managing Director.

3. Managing Director, Bihar State Co-operative Bank Limited, Ashok Raj Path, Patna-4.

4. Deputy General Manger, Personal and Administration, Bihar State Cooperative Bank Limited, Patna.-4.

5. Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Road No. 6, "R" Block, Patna. .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ram Janam Prasad, Advocate. For the E.P.F.O. : Mr. R. S. Pradhan, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Madhukar Mishra, A.C. to S.C. 31.

For the Bank : Mr. S. N. Pathak & Mr. S. K. Singh, Advocates.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL ORDER 24-08-2015 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

The issue of dispute in the present writ application pertains to whether the charging of interest by the Board of Trustees relating to advance taken by the petitioner from the Provident Fund account shall be at the rate of compound interest or simple interest. As per the submission of learned counsel appearing for the respondent Bihar State Co-operative Bank Limited, though the issue was decided in favour of the petitioner by the Division Bench of this Court, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has granted stay in favour of the

Patna High Court CWJC No.15005 of 2006 (7) dt.24-08-2015 2/2 Bank in S.L.P.(C) No. 22705-22706 of 2015 today itself. In view of the aforesaid, this Court does not deem it necessary to keep the matter pending.

Accordingly, the writ application stands disposed off.

However, the petitioner shall be at liberty to file an appropriate application, if so required, after the matter is finally decided by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. The personal appearance of respondent no. 2, who is present in Court, stands dispensed with.

(Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J.) Anand Kr.

U T