Alok Kumar v. The State Of Bihar Through The Chief Secretary Govt. Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.16937 of 2012 =========================================================== Alok Kumar Singh, Son of Late Triveni Pd. Singh, resident of Mohalla J-35, P.C. Colony, Kankarbagh, P.S. Kankarbagh, District Patna. .... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

2. The Secretary, Minor Water Resources Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

3. The Joint Secretary II, Minor Irrigation Water Resources Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

4. The Chief Engineer, Minor Water Resources Department, Government of Bihar, Patna Having its office at Vikash Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna.

5. The Chief Engineer (South) Nalkoop, Minor Water Resources Department, Sheikhpura, Patna.

6. The Accountant General, Veerchand Patel Path, Patna.

7. The Director, Provident Fund, Pant Bhawan, Bihar, Patna.

8. The Treasury Officer, Vikash Bhawan, New Secretariat, Bihar, Patna. .... .... Respondents =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shekhar Kumar Singh, Advocate : Mr. Pankaj Kumar Jha, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Ravindra Kumar, AC to AAG10 For Accountant General: Mr. Arun Kumar Arun, Advocate =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SAMARENDRA PRATAP SINGH ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 05-02-2016 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

The petitioner has retired as an Assistant from Minor Water Resources Department. At the time of his retirement, the petitioner was serving in Patna Secretariat.

The petitioner has raised a grievance with respect to non-payment of any of the retiral dues.

During the pendency of this writ application, the petitioner has been paid Group Insurance and Provident fund amount.

Patna High Court CWJC No.16937 of 2012 dt.05-02-2016 2 / 2 There is no clear statement by the respondents whether any leave encashment and gratuity have been paid.

It appears that a departmental proceeding was started against the petitioner long back in the year 2008. It is unfortunate that the proceeding has not concluded, which present a sorry state of affairs.

The petitioner has already filed his representations with respect to payment of remaining unpaid retiral dues, which are contained in Annexures-6 to 8 of the writ application. Pending final disposal of the departmental proceeding, which has not yet concluded in spite of 52 dates, the respondents would consider payment of leave encashment and gratuity. Such consideration must be made within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The writ application stands disposed of.

(Samarendra Pratap Singh, J.) Uday/- U