Disposed

Shambhu Prasad Saha v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Patna HC15 Sept 2016CWJC/5322/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition regarding non-payment of post-retiral dues, the Patna High Court granted the petitioner liberty to file a comprehensive representation before the competent authority. The court directed the authority to consider the claims within four months after a hearing.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to file a fresh comprehensive representation; direction to authority to decide claims within four months after hearing.

Shambhu Prasad Saha Vs The State Of Bihar and… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Patna HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.5322 of 2016

¶2

		====================================================== Shambhu Prasad Saha son of Late Ganesh Prasad Saha, resident of Janki Prasad Lane, Mundi Chak, P.O. Bhagalpur, P.S. Tilka Manjhi, District - Bhagalpur, the retired Assistant Engineer, Rural Works Department, Works Division, Danapur, Patna .... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna 2. The Principal Secretary, Rural Works Department, Government of Bihar, Patna 3. The Engineer-in-Chief-Cum-Additional Secretary-Cum-Special Secretary, Rural Works Department, Government of Bihar, Patna 4. The Chief Engineer, Rural Works Department, Government of Bihar, Patna 5. The Superintending Engineer, Rural Works Department, Work Circle, Patna 6. The Executive Engineer, Rural Works Department, Works Division, Danapur, Patna 7. The Director, Provident Fund Directorate, Pant Bhawan, Patna 8. The District Education officer, Patna, District - Patna 9. The Treasury officer, Patna, District - Patna 10. The Accountant General, Bihar, Patna .... .... Respondent/s ======================================================
		Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.S.B.K.Manglam, Advocate Ms. Anita Kumari, Advocate For the Respondent Nos. 1 to 9 : Mr. Rakesh Ambastha, AC to AAG 7 For the Respondent No. 10 : Mr.Satyendra Kumar Jha, Advocate
		====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA PRASAD VERMA ORAL ORDER
2	15-09-2016	Heard the parties. 2.In view of the nature of the grievances/claims raised on behalf of the petitioner about non-payment of his post retiral dues, fully enumerated in paragraph 1 of the writ petition, this Court is of the opinion that, instead of keeping the matter pending and asking all the respondents to file their counter affidavits, the interest of justice shall be subserved if the petitioner is granted liberty to file a fresh comprehensive representation before the respondent no.3, the Engineer-in-chief-cum-Additional Secretary-cum-Special Secretary, Department of Rural Works,

¶3

Patna High Court CWJC No.5322 of 2016 (2) dt.15-09-2016

¶4

2/2

¶5

Government of Bihar, Patna with all supporting documents raising all the pleas, which have been raised in the present writ petition. It is ordered accordingly.

¶6

3. If such a fresh comprehensive representation is filed on behalf of the petitioner with all supporting documents as also with a certified copy of the present order within a period of one month from today, then the respondent no.3 either himself or any other competent authority of the respondent State, as per direction of respondent no.3, shall be obliged to consider and decide the claims of the petitioner regarding payment of his retiral dues, by a reasoned and speaking order, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners, besides others, if any, at an early date preferably within a period of four months from the date of filing of such representation by the petitioner, in the manner indicated above.

¶7

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

¶8

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

¶9

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

¶10

(Birendra Prasad Verma, J)

¶11

Tahir/U

Shambhu Prasad Saha v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shambhu Prasad Saha v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Prabhash Kumar Pratap Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Leela Devi Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Shan Mohammad And Anr. Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Brajdeo Prasad Sinha Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Ram Lala Thakur Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Bina Devi Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.