Bal Krishna Yadav v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.16848 of 2014 ====================================================== Bal Krishna Yadav, son of Krit Narayan Yadav, resident of villageKatharva, Police Station-Madhepur, District Madhepura .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar, through the Principal Secretary, Human Resources Development Department, Government of Bihar, Patna

2. Director, Primary Education, Human Rerouces Development, Government of Bihar, Patna

3. The Regional Deputy Director of Education, Koshi Division, Saharsa.

4. Distsrict Eduction Officer, Madhepura

5. District Programme Officer, Establishment, Madhepura

6. District Treasury Officer, Madhepura

7. District Provident Fund Officer, Madhepura.

8. The Block Education Extension Officer, Block+Police Station Udakishunganj and District Madhepura

9. Headmaster, Primary Rajkiya School, Joteli, Police Station Udakishunganj, Disstrict Madhepura.

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Durgesh Kumar, Adv. For the Respondent/s : Mr.Jai Shankar Barnawal, G.A.5 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JYOTI SARAN ORAL ORDER 05-02-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.

There is no representation on behalf of the State. The petitioner has retired from the post of Primary Teacher, Udakishunganj in the district of Madhepura. The petitioner submits that having retired in August, 2012, he has neither been paid his post retrial benefits nor has he been paid the salary for the period 1.1.1997 until the date of his retirement. Learned counsel for the petitioner has referred to a recommendation of the Block Education Extension Officer dated 2.9.2008 present at Annexure-7

Patna High Court CWJC No.16848 of 2014 (2) dt.05-02-2016 2/2 regarding the payment of his salary which letter is addressed to the Regional Deputy Director of Education, Koshi Division, Saharasa and submits that the recommendation had no effect and petitioner remains without salary till retirement in August, 2012. Learned counsel has also referred to a representation of the petitioner addressed to the District Education officer, Madhepura dated 16.12.2013 raising his grievance regarding the payment of retiral benefits and salary but submits that it has not been disposed of.

Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and considering the nature of grievance raised, the writ petition is disposed of with the direction to the District Education Officer, Madhepura to consider the representation of the petitioner present at Annexure-7 and dispose of the claim expeditiously and preferably within 3 months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of the order and in case the claim is upheld then the admissible payments be made within 4 weeks thereafter however in case the claim set up by the petitioner is not found admissible, then the same may be disposed of by the speaking order to be passed within the period stipulated above.

The writ petition is disposed of.

(Jyoti Saran, J) Bibhash/- U