Surendra Singh v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 3284 of 2016 =========================================================== Surendra Singh, Son of Late Ramashish Singh, Resident of village- Kosut, P.S.- Dhanarua, District- Patna.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

2. The Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

3. The Divisional Commissioner, Patna Division, Patna.

4. The District Magistrate, Patna.

5. The Establishment Deputy Collector, Patna.

6. The Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Patna City, Patna.

7. The Circle Officer, Daniyawan, Patna.

8. The District Provident Fund Officer, Patna.

9. The Treasury Officer, Patna.

10. The Accountant General, Bihar, Patna.

.... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Santosh Kumar Singh, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Kumar Pankaj, A.C. to S.C. 5 =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 25-05-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and State.

2. Nobody appears on behalf of the Accountant General, despite copy of the application having been served on him on 08.02.2016 and name of learned counsel also appearing in the cause list.

3. At the very outset, learned counsel for the State, on the basis of submissions made and materials brought in the counter affidavit filed on behalf of respondents no. 4 to 7, submitted that all grievances of the petitioner, as detailed in the writ petition at

Patna High Court CWJC No.3284 of 2016 dt.25-05-2017 2/2 paragraph no. 9, stand redressed. He clarified that 90% provisional pension and gratuity has been paid but now the authorities have sanctioned final pension and gratuity and forwarded it to the Accountant General on 21.04.2016.

4. The position is not controverted by learned counsel for the petitioner.

5. In view thereof, the writ petition stands disposed off with a direction to the respondent no. 10, to ensure that the sanction order sent by the State authorities is acted upon and due authority issued in favour of the petitioner within three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order by him. Thereafter, the respondent no. 9 shall also ensure that actual payment is made to the petitioner in terms of the authority to be issued by the respondent no. 10, within four weeks thereafter. The petitioner upon receipt of the authority from the respondent no. 10, shall produce the same along with a copy of this order before the respondent no. 9.

(Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J.) P. Kumar AFR/NAFR U