Sirajul Haque Siddique v. The Union Of India And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 7110 of 2007 ====================================================== Sirajul Haque Siddique, S/o Late Shafiul Haque Siddique, R/o Mohalla - Imambara- Agah Bakur, P.S. 3, Kotwali Chowk, Lucknow, State - Uttar Pradesh, presently posted as : Senior Instructor, I.T.I., Digha Ghat, Patna. .... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The Union of India through the Secretary, Ministry of Labour, Shram Shakti Bhawan, Rafi Marg, New Delhi-1.

2. The Directorate General, Employment and Training, Ministry of Labour, Shram Shakti Bhawan, Rafi Marg, New Delhi-1.

3. The State of Bihar.

4. The Secretary, Department of Labour, Bihar, Patna.

5. The Director, Employment and Training, Bihar, Patna.

6. The Principal, I.T.I., Digha Ghat, Patna.

7. The State of Jharkhand.

8. The Secretary, Department of Labour, Jharkhand, Ranchi.

9. The Director, Employment and Training, Jharkhand, Ranchi.

10. The Principal, I.T.I., Dhanbad, Jharkhand. .... .... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Mr. Birendra Kumar For the Respondent/s : Mr. Mukul Prasad (AC to GP-18) Mr. N N Ojha ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 5.

07-03-2017 At the very outset, Sri Mukul Prasad, learned A.C. to Govt. Pleader - 18, in presence of Sri N.N. Ojha, learned counsel for respondent/State of Jharkhand as well as Sri Sanjay Kumar, learned counsel assisted by Sri Birendra Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that during the pendency of the writ petition, entire grievances of the petitioner have already been redressed. He submits that he has come alongwith a cheque regarding difference of salary for total amount of Rs. 1,40,180/-

Patna High Court CWJC No.7110 of 2007 (5) dt.07-03-2017 2/2 (one lac forty thousand one hundred & eighty only), vide Cheque no. 940328 dated 22-02-2017. Sri Prasad, learned State counsel further informed that sanction order of revised pension and gratuity has already been sent to the office of the Accountant General, Bihar.

Learned counsel for the petitioner, after accepting the cheque, did not dispute the submission made by learned counsel for the State.

In view of the fact that grievances of the petitioner have already been redressed, there is no reason to keep the matter pending.

The writ petition stands disposed of.

(Rakesh Kumar, J.) Anay U