Shahid Akhtar v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.6458 of 2016 ====================================================== Shahid Akhtar, S/o Late Abdul Rahman, Resident of Mohalla- Baghbhai Khan, Police Station- Sasaram, Post- Sasaram District- Rohtas. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna.

2. The Accountant General, Bihar, Patna.

3. The Director General of Provident Fund Panth Bhawan, Bihar, Patna.

4. The District Magistrate, Sasaram, Rohtas.

5. The Sub-Divisional Officer, Sasaram, Rohtas.

6. The District Provident Fund Officer Sasaram, Rohtas.

7. The Treasury Officer, Sasaram, Rohtas.

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Behzad Akhtar, Adv. For the Respondent nos.1&3to7: Mr. Rakesh Kumar Shrivastava, AC to GP-15 For the Respondent no.2 : Mr.L.P.K.Rajgrihar, Adv. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA PRASAD VERMA ORAL ORDER 16-09-2016 Heard the parties.

The petitioner having superannuated from service on 31.01.2016 from the post of Section Officer has filed the present writ petition for a direction to the competent authority for payment of his G.P.F. amount with 12% statutory interest. In view of the nature of the grievances/claims raised on behalf of the petitioner in the present writ petition, this Court is of the opinion that, instead of keeping the matter pending before this Court and asking all the respondents to file their separate counter affidavits in the present writ petition, the interest of justice shall be sub-served, if the petitioner is granted liberty to file a fresh comprehensive representation before the respondent District Magistrate, Rohtas at Sasaram with all supporting documents and

Patna High Court CWJC No.6458 of 2016 (2) dt.16-09-2016 raising all the pleas, which have been raised in the present writ petition. It is ordered accordingly.

If such a comprehensive representation is filed on behalf of the petitioner with a certified copy of the present order within a period of one month from today, then the respondent District Magistrate, Rohtas at Sasaram either himself or any other competent authority of the respondent State, as per his endorsement, shall be obliged to consider and decide the claims raised on behalf of the petitioner, by a reasoned and speaking order, after giving an opportunity of hearing to all concerned including the petitioner, besides others, if any, at an early date, preferably within a period of three months from the date of filing of such representation by the petitioner.

If on consideration of the materials, the competent authority comes to a conclusion that the claims raised on behalf of the petitioner are admissible to him, then the consequential orders shall also be issued for grant of such admissible claims without any unnecessary further delay.

It is clarified that this Court has not gone into the merits of the claims raised on behalf of the petitioner in the present writ petition and it is left to be decided by the competent authority strictly in accordance with law.

The writ petition stands finally disposed of with the observations and directions made above.

Arvind/- (Birendra Prasad Verma, J) U