Jagdish Verma v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.10767 of 2015 ====================================================== Jagdish Verma, Son of Late Shukan Verma, resident of villlage- Basaudha, Post- Sadishopur, Police Station- Bihta in the district of Patna. .... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Department of Revenue, Government. of Bihar, Patna.

2. The Principal Secretary, Department of Revenue, Government of Bihar, Patna.

3. The District Magistrate-cum-Collector, East Champaran at Motihari.

4. The District Establishment Collector, East Champaran at Motihari.

5. The Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Dhaka in the district of East Champaran at Motihari.

6. The Circle Officer, Dhaka in the district of East Champaran at Motihari.

7. The Accountant General, Bihar, Patna.

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

For the Petitioner : Mr. Sunil Kumar, Advocate For the Accountant General : Vivekanand Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. S. Rahman, A.C. to S.C.7 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE RAVI RANJAN ORAL ORDER 29-07-2015 Petitioner seeks direction for revision of his pension in Grade Pay of Rs.4200/- in the Pay Scale of Rs.5200-20200. It is contended that 3rd A.C.P. was granted to him with effect from 01.01.2009 by the office order contained in Memo No.497 dated 26.06.2013. He submits that arrears of difference of salary has already been given to him, however, his pension, gratuity and leave encashment have not been revised accordingly. Petitioner claims to have filed a representation before the District Magistrate, East Champaran also for the said purpose

Patna High Court CWJC No.10767 of 2015 (2) dt.29-07-2015 2/2 on 14.11.2014.

In above view of the matter, this writ application is being disposed of with a liberty to the petitioner to file a fresh representation before the District Magistrate-cum-Collector, East Champaran, Motihari clearly setting out his claim. On such representation having been filed, let the respondent no.3 take a decision in accordance with law within a period of four weeks from the date of filing of the same. In case, if he is found entitled for revision of pension and other retiral benefits then the benefits should be granted to him within a further period of four weeks. In case, petitioner's claim does not find favour with the concerned respondent then a reasoned order would be required to be passed by him.

(Dr. Ravi Ranjan, J) N.H./- U