Mahendra Nath Singh Vs The State of Bihar

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sudama Singh, Advocate Mr. Surendra Kumar Mishra, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Sudhanshu Trivedi, Advocate Mrs. Binita Singh, SC-28 For the VKU University : Mr. Rakesh Ranjan, Advocate Mr. Rajesh Prasad Choudhary, Advocate ======================================================

¶15

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL JUDGMENT

¶16

Date : 12-01-2024

¶17

Heard Mr. Sudama Singh, learned counsel appearing

¶18

on behalf of the petitioner, Mr. Rakesh Ranjan, learned counsel for the VKU University, Ara, Bhojpur and Mr. Sudhanshu Trivedi, learned counsel for the State.

¶19

It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that though during the pendency of the present writ petition, on account of intervention of this Court, certain substantive amount has been paid, but, still, the petitioner has not been paid the benefit of final earned leave encashment and there is no calculation chart, showing actual entitlement and corresponding

¶20

Patna High Court CWJC No.2718 of 2021 dt.12-01-2024 2/2

¶21

payments under different heads and, thus, the petitioner is facing difficulty to make his proper claim before the respondent authorities. He further submits that there are still certain other grievances, which has not been answered by the University.

¶22

Considering the nature of the dispute, this Court deems it apt and proper to dispose of the writ petition, with a direction to the respondent University to consider the remaining claim of the petitioner and ensure payment of all the admissible dues, preferably within a period of eight weeks, from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.

¶23

In order to facilitate the claim of the petitioner, this Court directs the petitioner to file an appropriate representation, by giving particulars of his claim under different heads, which shall be taken note of, while disposing the claim of the petitioner, in accordance with law.

¶24

It is needless to observe that, in case of any defiance of the order of this Court, the Officer found responsible for non payment of admissible dues shall be dealt with sternly and liable for interest over the delayed payment.

¶25

This disposes the writ petition.

¶26

(Harish Kumar, J)

¶27

shivank/-

¶28

AFR/NAFR	NAFR
CAV DATE	NA
Uploading Date	15.01.2024.
Transmission Date	NA

Mahendra Nath Singh v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mahendra Nath Singh v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sheela Kumari, Vs The State of Bihar

Birendra Kumar Sinha Vs Zila Parishad, Patna

Rampati Devi Vs The Bihar State Road Transport Corporation

Sharda Sinha (Padmabhushan) Vs The State of Bihar

Dr. Uday Chandra Mishra Vs The State of Bihar

Surendra Kumar Ray @ Surendra Kumar Vs the Union of India through Narcotics Control Bureau, Govt. of India