Patna High CourtC. REV./429/2014dismissed

Bechan Pandey v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2016-09-21Mr. Justice Chakradhari Sharan Singh2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Review No.429 of 2014 IN Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 11750 of 2011 =========================================================== Bechan Pandey, S/o Late Lal Bihari Pandey, Resident of Village + Post-Office - Pirhi, P.S.- Babubarhi, District- Madhubani.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through The Secretary, Human Resources Development Department, Vikash Bhawan , Patna.

2. The Director, Primary Education, Vikash Bhawan , Patna.

3. The District Education Officer, Madhubani.

4. The District Provident Officer, Madhubani. .... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shailendra Pd., Advocate Mr. Sanjay Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Tripurari Nath Ambastha, A.C. to S.C.-26 =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHAKRADHARI SHARAN SINGH ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 21-09-2016 The petitioner seeks review of an order dated 20.11.2014 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 11750 of 2011 by this Court whereby his writ application filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, has been dismissed noticing the fact that difference of salary for the period 1st January 1971 to 31st March, 1973 was credited in his account in 1980-1981. The writ petition was filed for payment of arrears of difference of salary for the period 1st January 1971 to 31st March, 1973 and outstanding amount of General Provident Fund. This Court in the order under review came to the conclusion on the basis of

Patna High Court C. REV. No.429 of 2014 dt.21-09-2016 2/2 materials on record that the entire amount of provident fund standing to the credit of the petitioner with statutory interest, were paid to him. Since a dispute was being raised over for payment of statutory interest, this Court recorded that such disputed questions of fact could not be gone into in the writ proceeding and since the petitioner was raising stale claim for the period from 1st January 1971 to 31st March, 1973, his application could not be entertained. I do not find that there is any error apparent on record warranting the review of the said order.

This application is, accordingly, dismissed.

(Chakradhari Sharan Singh, J) Vats/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE Uploading Date 23.09.2016 Transmission Date 23.09.2016