IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.12202 of 2010 MALTI KUMARI,W/O Raj Kumar Singh, resident of Village Sultanpur, P.S. Mokama, District Patna. ---Petitioner Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR, through its Secretary, Human Resources Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna, New Secretariat. 2. The Accountant General, Bihar, Patna. 3. District Superintendent of Education, Patna. 4. Block Education Development Officer, Mokama, Patna. 5. Incharge Headmaster Middle School, Sultanpur, Mokama, Patna. 6. Ex-Secretary, Vidyalaya Shiksha Samittee, Middle School, Sultanpur, Mr. Pankaj Kumar, son of Awadhesh Sharma, resident of Village Sultanpur, P.S. Mokama, District Patna. ---Respondents ----------- 2. 2.8.2010 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing for the respondent-State as also the Accountant General. The grievance of the petitioner is that upon her superannuation on 31st of January, 2009 as an Assistant Teacher while holding the post of In-Charge Headmistress of Middle School, Sultanpur, Mokama, Patna, she could not receive her retiral dues even though she had received the Pension Intimation Memo and the Gratuity Payment Order as well as the Commutation Payment Order issued by the Office of the Accountant General, Bihar, Patna as contained in Annexure 4 series. Learned counsel for the petitioner, however, submits that upon the superannuation of the petitioner, the present Headmistress is required to issue “No Dues Certificate” since the 2 petitioner on the recommendation of the School Education Committee gave certain money to the then Secretary of the said Committee, namely, Pankaj Kumar for construction of the School building. However, it appears that said Pankaj Kumar had not done the work in full. Be that as it may, the petitioner is not receiving her pensionary benefits even though sanctioned. Learned counsel for the State, on the other hand, submits that the matter needs to be verified with regard to the payment of advances made by the petitioner and the corresponding work done by said Pankaj Kumar. In the above circumstances, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that although the petitioner had filed representation requesting the District Education Officer to complete the measurement of the work done, however, same having not been done, the petitioner is not receiving the full pension. As such, the petitioner proposes to file a fresh representation before the District Superintendent of Education, Patna (respondent no.3). In case such a representation is filed stating the details of her grievances as also enclosing the copy of the relevant documents, if any, in support of such claims along with the certified copy of the present order within a period of four weeks, the grievances of the petitioner be considered in accordance with law expeditiously, preferably within a period of three months on receipt of such representation, so that the grievances of the petitioner may be redressed to enable her to receive the pensionary benefits as sanctioned by the Accountant General. 3 The writ application stands disposed of with the above observations/directions. PNM (Shailesh Kumar Sinha, J.)