Premchand Prasad v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 16140 of 2016 =========================================================== Premchand Prasad Son of Late Shambhu Nath Prasad, Panchayat Secretary, Resident of Village- Nagwa, Police Station- Naubatpur, District- Patna. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Director, Panchayati Raj, New Secretariat, Patna.

2. The District Magistrate, Patna.

3. The Deputy Development Commissioner, Patna.

4. The District Development Officer, Patna.

5. The District Panchayati Rajya Officer cum Conducting Officer, Patna.

6. The Block Development Officer, Bikram, Patna.

7. The Director General, Provident Fund Directorate, Department of Finance, Patna, Bihar.

8. The Accountant General, Birchand Patel Path, Patna. .... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.

For the Respondent/s :

Mr.

=========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 22-11-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner; State and Accountant General.

2. The petitioner has moved the Court for the following reliefs:

"That this is an application for issuance of appropriate writ or writs, director or directions commanding the Respondents to pay the retiral dues including Pension, Gratuity, G.P.F., Leave Encashment and the amount deducted in compulsory insurance scheme Account etc. as well as the payment of salary in view of the order dated 14.11.2003 passed in C.W.J.C. No.

6918/2003 and/or issuance of appropriate writ or writs for payment of

Patna High Court CWJC No.16140 of 2016 dt.22-11-2018 2/2 statutory as well as penal interest thereon and is also entitled to get Time Bond Promotion which has not been given during his entire service period and/or issuance of any other writ or writs under the facts and circumstances of the case."

3. In view of the pleadings on record, the Court finds that the admitted retiral benefits of the petitioner have been paid.

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

5. However, for any other grievance the petitioner may have with regard to the period when he was in service, it will be open to him to move before the appropriate forum, in accordance with law.

(Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J.) Anand Kr.

AFR/NAFR U