Patna High CourtCWJC/1065/2016disposed

Ratneshwar Prasad Yadav v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2017-11-13Mr. Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 1065 of 2016 ====================================================== Ratneshwar Prasad Yadav, Son of Late Binda Prasad Yadav, resident of village:- Gadha, P.S.- Paroo, District- Muzaffarpur. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through Principal Secretary, Education Department, Govt. of Bihar, New Secretariat, Patna.

2. The Accountant General, Mahalekhakar Bhawan, Brishna Patel Marg, Patna.

3. The District Magistrate, Muzaffarpur.

4. The District Education Officer, Muzaffarpur.

5. The District Program Officer, Establishment, Education Department, Muzaffarpur.

6. The Drawing and Dispersing Officer, Rajkiya Madhya Vidyalay, Paroo, Balak Paroo Block, Muzaffarpur.

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr.

For the State of Bihar : Mr. Upendra Pratap Singh, AC to SC-4 For the Accountant General : Mr. Anjani Kumar Sharan, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL ORDER 13-11-2017 Nobody appears on behalf of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the State and Accountant General have assisted the Court.

2. The petitioner has moved the Court seeking payment of gratuity and encashment of unutilized leave of 39 days and also the remaining 10% of pension, which was withheld.

3. Earlier a counter affidavit had been filed on behalf of the Accountant General taking the stand that the authorities

Patna High Court CWJC No.1065 of 2016 (4) dt.13-11-2017 2/2 have been asked for sending sanction order.

4. On 04.07.2017, a co-ordinate Bench had indicated the stand of learned counsel for the petitioner that the matter cannot be resolved by reference to the Lok Adalat. Today, learned counsel for the Accountant General submitted that as per the instructions received by him, authority has been issued on 13.07.2017, with regard to the claim of the petitioner.

5. In view of the fact that today nobody is appearing on behalf of the petitioner and the stand taken by learned counsel for the Accountant General, the Court can only presume that the grievance of the petitioner stands redressed and that he is not interested in pursuing the matter.

6. In view thereof, the writ petition stands disposed off.

7. However, if the petitioner feels that anything further remains unpaid, he shall be at liberty to approach the authority concerned by filing a representation which shall be considered in accordance with law.

(Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J.) P. Kumar U