Haridwar Singh v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.10044 of 2015 ====================================================== Haridwar Singh son of late Lekha Singh, resident of village Mithapur, P.O. Lai, P.S. Bihta, District Patna, .... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Education Department, Vikash Bhawan, Bailey Road, ;Patna,

2. The Director, Secondary Education, Education Department, Vikash Bhawan Secretariat, Bailey Road, ;Patna,

3. The Director, Directorate General, Provident Fund, Pant Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna,

4. The Collector, Patna, District Patna,

5. The District Provident Officer, Patna,

6. The District Programme Officer, (Establishment), District Patna,

7. The Sub-Treasury Officer, Dinapur(Patna),

8. The Headmaster, High School, Chiraura, District Patna, .... .... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner : Mr. Ghanshyam Sharma, Advocate For the State : Ms. Divya Verma, AC to AAG 3 s===================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE RAVI RANJAN ORAL ORDER 13-07-2015 I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State.

Grievance of the petitioner is that he has not been given interest on his G.P.F. at the admissible rate for the years 198586 to 1998-99 in terms of the Government Resolution Nos. 4184 and 4193 dated 13.07.1983. He has also not been supplied the relevant documents, i.e., GPF deduction from July 1985 to last deduction and calculation chart of GPF etc. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that he has already represented to the Headmaster of the school who, vide

Patna High Court CWJC No.10044 of 2015 (2) dt.13-07-2015 Annexure 2, had already written to the District Programme Officer, (Establishment), i.e. respondent no. 6, requesting him to supply all the documents to the District Provident Officer, Patna(respondent no. 5), so that the petitioner's grievance could be redressed. The petitioner has also represented to the District Provident Officer, Patna, in this regard, however, it is contended that no decision has been taken as yet. In above view of the matter, this writ application is being disposed of with a direction to the respondent no. 6, i.e., the District Programme Officer,(Establishment), Patna to immediately supply the relevant records and register etc. to the District Provident Officer, Patna, within two weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order, would examine the same and if some discrepancy is found then he would be required to rectify the same by passing an order within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.

It is made clear that if the petitioner's grievance is not found to be correct and redressable then a reasoned order would be required to be passed by the authority concerned. (Dr. Ravi Ranjan, J) SC/- U