Sakur Mahammad v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 2 of 2015 =========================================================== Sakur Mahammad Son of Late Habib Mian, Resident of Village-Brahmsthan, P.SBhagwanpur, District-Siwan. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Secretary, Department of Education, Bihar, Patna.

2. The Director Primary Education Department, Bihar, Patna.

3. The Regional Deputy Director, Saran, Chapra.

4. The District Education Officer, (D.E.O), Siwan, District-Siwan.

5. The District Programme Officer, (D.P.O), Siwan, District-Siwan.

6. The Accountant General, Bihar, Patna.

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Arbind Kumar, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Amit Prakash, G.A. 13 For the Accountant General :

Mr. Raghwanand, Advocate =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 17-09-2018 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 an appropriate writ in the nature of Mandamus commanding the respondents to pay the due Benefit of second time bound promotion with the interest and also pay the due amount of G.P.F. prior to 1976 with interest to the petitioner."

3. Today, it is not in dispute that G.P.F. amount has been paid and only the claim for benefit of Second Time Promotion remains.

Patna High Court CWJC No.2 of 2015 dt.17-09-2018 2/2

4. After some arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that in this regard he has already moved before the appropriate authority i.e., respondent no. 5 by filing a representation on 17.12.2014, which is pending. He submitted that the writ petition be disposed off with a direction to the authorities to dispose off the representation.

5. Learned counsel for the State does not object.

6. Having regard to the aforesaid, the writ petition stands disposed off with a direction to respondent no. 5 to consider and dispose off the representation filed by the petitioner, copy of which has been made Annexure-2 (series) to the writ petition dated 17.12.2014, by passing a reasoned order, if already not so done, expeditiously and latest within a period of two months from the date of production of a copy of this order before him.

7. The Court would clarify that it has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the matter.

(Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J.) P. Kumar AFR/NAFR U