IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.21563 of 2011 Bankeshwar Prasad Singh, son of Late Yadu Nandan Prasad, resident of village Rajaura, P.S. Barbigha, District Sheikhpura. ... ... Petitioner. Versus 1. The State Of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Department of Human Resources Development, Government of Bihar, Patna. 2. The Director, Department of Human Resources Development, Government of Bihar, Patna. 3. The Director, Provident Fund, Bihar, Patna. 4. The District Magistrate, Lakhisarai. 5. The District Provident Fund Officer, Munger. 6. The District Education Officer, Lakhisarai. 7. The Treasury Officer, Lakhisarai. 8. The Accountant General, Bihar, Birchand Patel Path, Patna. ... ... Respondents. ---------------------------------- 2. 7.12.2011. Heard Shri Pramod Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Arjun Kumar Singh, learned A.C. to S.C.2 appearing on behalf of the respondent/State. The petitioner, who retired with effect from 31.1.2000 as Assistant Teacher from Primary School, Jankidih, Lakhisarai, has prayed for directing the respondents to pay difference of salary deducted in between 1.1.1971 and 31.3.1973 from the salary of the petitioner and deposited in the G.P.F. account and also for payment of amount kept in suspense account. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that despite the fact that petitioner retired long back and also filed 2 representation for the claim raised in the present writ petition, the respondents have not bothered either to take decision on his representation or to pay the claimed amount to the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn my attention to Annexure-1 series to the writ petition and submits that representations were filed by the petitioner before the authority concerned. In view of the facts and circumstances, particularly the fact that petitioner retired in the year 2000 and no decision has been taken either on the representation of the petitioner or claimed amount has been paid, the court is of the opinion that the writ petition can be disposed of granting liberty to the petitioner to file a fresh representation before respondent no.6/District Education Officer, Lakhisarai within a period of six weeks from today in respect of claim made in the present writ petition. If such representation is filed within aforesaid time, respondent no.6 is required to examine the same and pass appropriate order 3 in accordance with law within a period of two months from the date of filing of such representation. If respondent no.6 considers the claim of the petitioner as genuine, he is required to pass order for payment of the claimed amount along with admissible statutory interest within a period of two months from the date of filing of such representation. Even in case of refusal, respondent no.6 is required to pass a speaking order and communicate the same to the petitioner within two months from the date of filing of such representation. With above observation and direction, the writ petition stands disposed of. N.H./ ( Rakesh Kumar,J.)