The State Of Bihar And ORS v. Viveka Nand Prasad And ANR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Letters Patent Appeal No.765 of 2016 IN Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 2940 of 2013 ===========================================================
1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Water Resources Department, Government of Bihar Patna.
2. The Engineer in Chief-cum-Special Secretary (Middle), Water Resources Department, Government of Bihar, Sinchai Bhawan, Patna.
3. The Engineer in Chief-cum-Special Secretary (North), Water Resources Department, Government of Bihar, Sinchai Bhawan, Patna.
4. The Deputy Secretary, Water Resources Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
5. The Under Secretary, Water Resources Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
6. The Under Secretary, Command Area Development Department, Under Water Resources Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
7. The Chief Engineer Darbhagna, Water Resources Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
8. The Chief Engineer Muzaffarpur, Water Resource Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
9. The Director, Provident Fund, Government of Bihar, Patna.
10. The Treasury Officer, Samastipur.
.... .... Respondents- Appellant/s
Versus
1. Viveka Nand Prasad Son of Late Anand Lal Das Resident of A/101, Sumeet Sadan, Dhawan Regancy Road No. 4A, P.O.- GPO, P.S.- Gardanibagh, Patna. Writ petitioner-Respondent.
2. The Accountant General, Bihar, Patna.
.... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Md. Khurshid Alam, AAG-12 Mr. Fakhruddin Ali Ahmad, AC to AAG-12 For the Respondent/s :
=========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE And HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPADHYAY ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) Date: 26-07-2017 Re.: Interlocutory Application No.3088 of 2016 The delay of 53 in filing of this Appeal is condoned.
Patna High Court LPA No.765 of 2016 dt.26-07-2017 2/2 Interlocutory Application stands allowed and disposed of. Re.: Letters Patent Appeal No.765 of 2016 Considering the fact that the learned Writ Court has only directed for payment of 6% per annum on the delayed payment of gratuity to the writ petitioner-respondent No.1 herein, we see no reason to interfere in the matter. The appeal is, therefore, dismissed. (Rajendra Menon, CJ) (Anil Kumar Upadhyay, J) Sunil/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date 27.07.2017 Transmission Date