Surendra Pratap Singh v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.5293 of 2017 ====================================================== Surendra Pratap Singh Son of late Kailash Singh Resident of C/o Thakur Rameshwar Singh, Behind Kali Mandir, Kanti Factory Road, Kankarbagh, P.S.- Agam Kuan, District- Patna.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State Of Bihar 2.

The Principal Secretary, Finance Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. 3.

The Director Agricluture, Agriculture Department Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 4.

The Chief General Manager, State Bank of India, Local Head Office, Gandhi Maidan, Patna.

5.

The Assistant General Manager, S.B.I. Centralized Pension Processing Cell, Administration Office , 6.

The Chief Manager, State Bank of India, N.M.C.H. Branch, Patna. 7.

The Accountant General A and E IT, Bihar, Patna. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Santosh Kumar For the Respondent/s :

Mr.Raghwanand, GA-11 For the S.B.I.

: Mr. Rakesh Kumar Singh For the A.G.

: Dr. Anand Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH ORAL ORDER 24-07-2019 The present writ petition has been filed seeking the following reliefs:- "(I). For issuance of writ in nature of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding respondents to pay correct pension payment (Rs. 14,140/- in place of being paid Rs. 13,171/- as per Govt. guide lines in favour of petitioner.

(II). For issuance of an other, direction or writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to revise the pension of the petitioners and pay the arrear of pension amount up to tune of Rs. 2,32,459/- calculated up to December, 2016.

(III). For issuance of an order, direction or writ in

Patna High Court CWJC No.5293 of 2017(7) dt.24-07-2019 2/2 the nature of mandamus directing the Respondents to pay the interest thereon on market rate of interest.

(IV). Any other relief/reliefs may be granted in favour of the petitioner for which he is found entitled to in the facts and circumstances of the case."

This Court is of the opinion that the nature of dispute is such that it would warrant an adjudication by the respondent authorities, hence I grant liberty to the petitioner to approach the respondent no. 2 by filing an appropriate representation, setting out his claim as also annexing relevant judgments in his support, within a period of four weeks from today, whereupon the respondent no. 2 shall pass a reasoned and speaking order within a period of 12 weeks thereafter.

(Mohit Kumar Shah, J) S.Sb/- U