Sayed Kalmuddin Hassan, v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.15339 of 2021 ====================================================== Sayed Kalmuddin Hassan, Son of Sayed Anvar Hussain, Resident of VillageEkbal Hassan Road, Kila Chowk, PS-Barhampura, Post-MIT, DistrictMuzaffarpur, and the above address is earlier known as Village Barmatpur, Post-Damodarpur, PS-Kanti, District-Muzaffarpur. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through the Director, Land Records and Survey Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

2.

The Accountant General, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 3.

The District Magistrate, Madhepura, Distict-Madhepura cum Settlement Officer, Madhepura, District-Madhepura.

4.

The Additional Collecto-cum-Disciplinary Authority, District-Madhepura. 5.

The Sub-divisional Magistrate, Madhepura cum Treasury Officer, Madhepura, District-Madhepura.

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Ravi Ranjan, Adv.

For the Respondent/s :

Mr.Lalit Kishore, AG Mr.Sarvesh Kumar Singh, AAG-13 Mr.Rajat Kumar Tiwary, AC to AAG-13 ================================= ===================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH ORAL ORDER 07-02-2024

1. The present writ petition has been filed seeking the following relief(s):- "1. That this writ application is being filed on behalf of the petitioner noted above for the issuance of writ in the nature of Mandamus, commanding the Respondents or any other writ or writs, order/orders, directing the Respondents to pay the retiral dues of the petitioner who has superannuated from the office of Respondent No. 3 as office attendant (Karyalaya Parichari) on 30/09/2019 but even after a lapse of more than year, the petitioner had not been given

Patna High Court CWJC No.15339 of 2021(3) dt.07-02-2024 2/2 either pension or the other retiral dues save and except his own contribution under the heading GPF amount and in spite of the petitioner's representation in person from pillar to post, no action is being taken up by the Respondents."

2. At the outset, the learned counsel for the respondent-State submits, by referring to the supplementary counter affidavit filed in the present case, that all the retiral dues of the petitioner has stood paid during the interregnum period and now he is also being paid pension, hence the present writ petition has been rendered infructuous.

3. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed off as having been rendered infructuous.

(Mohit Kumar Shah, J) sonal/- U