Shambhu Sharan Pd. Singh v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.21365 of 2014 ====================================================== Shambhu Sharan Pd. Singh, S/O Late Ramchandra Prasad Singh, R/O Raghunath Path, Bailey Road, P.S.- Danapur in the District - Patna. .... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through its Director General of Police, Bihar, Patna.

2. The Inspector General of Police (Head Quarter and Administration), Bihar, Patna.

3. Deputy Inspector General of Police (Personal and Administrative Dept.), Bihar, Patna.

4. The Dy.S.P. headquarter Lakhisarai.

5. The Superintendent of Police, Lakhisarai.

6. The District Provident Fund Officer, Lakhisarai.

7. The Treasury Officer, Lakhisarai.

8. The Treasury Office, Lakhisarai.

9. The Accountant General, State of Bihar.

.... .... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner : Mr. Sanjeev Kumar, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Kumar Manish, SC-21 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KISHORE KUMAR MANDAL ORAL ORDER 20-08-2016 Heard both sides.

The petitioner retired from the post of Police Inspector on 31.01.2014. As the entire post retiral dues was not cleared and authorized, he filed writ application for a direction upon the respondents to fix the final pension, to pay the GPF amount, to direct the respondent to pay gratuity amount and also the arrears of pension on revised pay scale.

A counter affidavit is filed on behalf of respondent no.5. There is no rejoinder.

The counsel for the State has drawn attention of the

Patna High Court CWJC No.21365 of 2014 (2) dt.20-08-2016 2/2 Court to Annexure-A, in order to submit that the final pension, the final gratuity as well as the authorization of the outstanding utilized leave encashment have already been cleared and authorized. In so far as the payment of GPF amount is concerned, it is stated that the instruction has already been issued to the authority to sanction and pay the GPF amount of the petitioner. On going through the averments made in the counter affidavit and looking to the prayer of the writ petition, I am satisfied that the grievance of the petitioner has substantially been redressed by the respondents.

If the amount under the head of GPF has not been authorized/ paid to the petitioner till date then liberty is granted to file a representation before the District Provident Fund Officer (Respondent no.6). If any such representation is filed, the respondent DPFO will consider the grievance of the petitioner and take steps for redressal of the said grievance in accordance with the law as quickly as possible preferably within six weeks from filing of such representation/ application along with a copy of this order.

The writ application is disposed of.

(Kishore Kumar Mandal, J.) ravi/- U T