Om Prakash Singh v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.10258 of 2013 =========================================================== Om Prakash Singh Son of Late Ramayan Singh, resident of village- Kahra P.S.- Doudpur, Distt.-Saran.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through Principal Secretary, Water Resources Department, Bihar, Patna.

2. The Chief Engineer, Mechanical, Water Resources Department, Bihar, Patna.

3. Superintending Engineer, Irrigation, Mechanical Circle, Birpur in this District of Supaul.

4. The Executive Engineer, Irrigation, Mechanical Division, Darbhanga

5. Director, Provident Fund Cell, Pant Bhawan, Patna.

6. District Provident Fund Officer, Darbhanga. .... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Tara Nath Jha For the Respondent/s : Mr. Prabhakar Jha, GP-27 Mr. Umesh Narain Dubey, AC =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVAJI PANDEY ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 28-07-2016 Heard the parties.

In the present case, the petitioner is seeking the relief of third A.C.P.

The benefit has already been extended to the petitioner, who has confined his relief with regard to the following claims:- (i) The petitioner has been given the A.C.P. from 01.01.2009 and he has worked there upto 31.01.2010, he is claiming that he has not been paid

Patna High Court CWJC No.10258 of 2013 dt.28-07-2016 2/3 the difference of salary including the leave salary. (ii) Claim has been made by the petitioner that he has not been given the interest from 7th October 2010 to 15th Aril 2011, as the Annexure-2 itself discloses that the respondent authority has calculated the interest upto July 2010, but the authority slip has been given to the petitioner on 15th April 2011 and as such, he is entitled to the interest of the aforesaid period.

(iii) Claim has been made by the petitioner that he has not been paid the T.A. bill, though he has deposited his claim application for the same which has been disputed by the State counsel. The petitioner has brought the receipt which has been annexed as Annexure-8.

(iv) Claim has been made by the petitioner that he has been treated at Nagarmal Modi Seva Sadan Seva Sadan Path, Ranchi and he has not been paid the amount which he has incurred during the treatment.

The State has filed an affidavit where it has been stated that the State Government has not recognised the said Hospital for the

Patna High Court CWJC No.10258 of 2013 dt.28-07-2016 3/3 purposes of treatment of the Government employees. The counsel for the petitioner submits that this hospital has been recognised by the Central Government as C.G.H.S. and there is no dispute that the petitioner has been treated in the said hospital. The Government may reimburse the amount at the rate the hospital has been recognised by the State Government or it should be verified whether this hospital has been recognised by the Central Government, whichever the higher amount should be paid to the petitioner.

For the convenience, the petitioner is directed to file a detailed representation annexing all the relevant documents in his favour along with a copy of this order, before the Chief Engineer, Mechanical, Water Resources Department, Bihar, Patna, who will examine the case of the petitioner and pass a reasoned order within a period of three months from the date of filing of the representation. With the above observation/direction, this petition is disposed of.

(Shivaji Pandey, J) Mahesh/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE Uploading Date 02.08.2016 Transmission Date