Patna High CourtMJC/316/2015disposed

Sri Ram Paswan v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2016-01-20Mr. Justice Samarendra Pratap Singh2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.316 of 2015 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 1126 of 2013 ====================================================== Sri Ram Paswan, son of Late Bangali Ram, resident of village- Sonehathu, Police Station- Haspura in the district of Aurangabad. .... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through District Magistrate, Aurangabad.

2. The District Magistrate, Aurangabad, namely, Navin Chandra Jha, son of not known to the petitioner.

3. The Sub- Divisional Officer, Daudnagar, Aurangabad, namely, Bhim Prasad, son of not known to the petitioner.

4. Block Development Officer, Goh, Aurangabad, namely, Alok Kumar, son of not known to the petitioner.

5. The District Provident Fund Officer, Aurangabad, namely, Praween Kumar, son of not known to the petitioner.

6. The Accountant General Office, Bihar, Patna, namely, P.K. Singh, son of not known to the petitioner .... .... Opposite Parties ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Prabhu Narayan Sharma For the Respondent/s : Mr. Dinbandhu Singh ======================================================

CORAM:

HONOURABLE MR.

JUSTICE SAMARENDRA PRATAP SINGH ORAL ORDER 20-01-2016 The petitioner is son of late Bengali Ram, who retired on 31.03.2011 while serving as Panchayat Sevak in Goh Block within Aurangabad district. The petitioner's father died on 24.08.2011 before he was paid any of the retiral dues. The writ application was disposed of with a direction to the respondents to pay the admitted dues within six months. A show-cause has been filed on behalf of opposite party nos. 2 to 4. In the show-cause, the opposite parties state that they have paid the admitted retiral dues.

Patna High Court MJC No.316 of 2015 (2) dt.20-01-2016 2 / 2 Counsel for the petitioner disputes the claim of the opposite parties that all admitted dues have been paid. In my view, if the petitioner finds that any of the admissible dues is not paid, he will make a detailed representation before the District Magistrate, Aurangabad, who will enquire into the matter as to whether all the dues admissible have been paid to the petitioner or not.

With the aforesaid observation, this application stands disposed of.

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