Arjun Prasad v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.8998 of 2020 ====================================================== Arjun Prasad Son of late- Rakatu Prasad Resident of Village- Raghopur, P.S.- Ranitalab (Kanpa), District- Patna.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar Through the Principal Secretary, Water Resources Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

2.

The Principal Secretary, Water Resources Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

3.

The Under Secretary, Water Resources Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

4.

The Deputy Collector, Revenue Division, Mohania, Kaimur. 5.

The Executive Engineer, Sone Upper Level Canal Division, Bhabhua. 6.

The Accountant General, Bihar Patna.

7.

The District Provident Fund Officer, Rohtas, Sasaram. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Amit Kumar Anand For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Sanjay Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 19-01-2024 Heard Mr. Amit Kumar Anand, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. Sanjay Kumar, learned counsel for the State.

2. At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioner submits at the Bar that admittedly the petitioner superannuated from the post of 4th Grade employee on 30.09.2001, however, the benefits which accrued in favour of the petitioner, owing to his superannuation, the same has now been accorded to him, but belatedly after 20 years, that too on the intervention of the

Patna High Court CWJC No.8998 of 2020 dt.19-01-2024 2/3 Hon'ble court. He, thus, submitted that in any view of the matter, the petitioner is entitled to interest over the delayed payment as there is no laches on the part of the petitioner. However, he fairly submits that so far the admissible dues of the petitioner are concerned, the same has already been paid during the pendency of the writ petition.

3. At this juncture, learned counsel for the State submits that the petitioner has already been paid his substantial benefits after his superannuation and the grievance was only with respect to payment of GPF for the period 1962-63 and further the monetary benefits accruing out of promotion, apart from other dues as has been stated in paragraph no. 1 of the writ petition, has already been settled, in accordance with law.

4. Having considered the submissions advanced on behalf of the respective parties, the present writ petition stands disposed of.

5. Needless to observe that if the petitioner has still any grievance with respect to interest over the delayed payment, he is at liberty to file an appropriate representation before the respondent no. 5, preferably within a period of eight weeks from today. In case, such representation is filed, the concerned respondent(s) shall consider and dispose of the same by a

Patna High Court CWJC No.8998 of 2020 dt.19-01-2024 3/3 reasoned and speaking order, within a further period of eight weeks thereafter.

6. This disposes the writ petition.

(Harish Kumar, J) Anjani/- AFR/NAFR CAV DATE Uploading Date 22.01.2024 Transmission Date