IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.21798 of 2011 Nand Lal Paswan son of late Basant Paswan of village Bari Kewai P.O. Dauiyanmath, P.S. Shajalanpur, District Patna. ... ... Petitioner. Versus 1. The State Of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna. 2. The accountant General, Bihar, Patna. 3. The D.G. cum I.G. of Police, Bihar, Patna. 4. The D.I.G. of Police Central Range, Patna. 5. The Senior S.P. Patna. ... ... Respondents. ---------------------------------- 2. 9.12.2011. Heard Shri Ram Hirday Prasad, who was assisted by Smt. Nirmala Kumari, learned counsel for the petitioner, Shri Rakesh Ambashtha, learned A.C. to A.A.G.15 appearing on behalf of respondent nos.1 and 3 to 5 and Shri Raj Nandan Prasad, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent no.2/Accountant General. The petitioner had retired in the year 1997 as Constable from Patna District Police. After retirement, all the retiral dues have been paid and petitioner is getting pension. It has been asserted that till date petitioner is getting pension in old scale. A prayer has been made to direct both the respondents to revise his pension as per 5th and 6th Pay Commission Report. It was submitted that the petitioner, for the relief sought for in 2 the present writ petition, has also filed representations before respondent no.5/Senior Superintendent of Police, Patna repeatedly, but till date, no decision has been taken nor his pension has been revised. The petitioner has also filed representation before respondent no.2/Accountant General for the purpose. In view of the facts and circumstances, the court is of the opinion that writ petition can be disposed of granting liberty to the petitioner to file a fresh representation before respondent no.2/Accountant General, Bihar, Patna as well as respondent no.5/Senior Superintendent of Police, Patna regarding relief sought for in the present writ petition within a period of six weeks from today. If such representation is filed, both the respondents are required to examine the same and pass appropriate order in accordance with law within a period of one month from the date of filing of such representation. If both the respondents consider the claim of the petitioner as genuine, they are required to pass 3 appropriate order revising the pension of the petitioner within aforesaid time. Even in case of refusal, both the respondents are required to pass speaking order and communicate the same to the petitioner within one month from the date of filing of such representation. With above observation and direction, the writ petition stands disposed of. N.H./ ( Rakesh Kumar,J.)