IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.3955 of 2013 ====================================================== Brij Nandan Singh Son of Sri Sheo Pujari Singh Quarter No. 3A., D.V.C. Colony, Jakkanpur, P.S- Gardanibagh, Working as Assistant Operator in Mithapur Grid, Patna. .... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. Chairman, through Secretary Bihar State Electricity Board, Now, C.M.D. Bihar State Power Holding Company, Vidyut Bhawan, Patna. 2. The General Manager- Cum- Chief Engineer, Transmission, Zone, New Punaichak, Patna. 3. The Electrical Superintending Engineer, Transmission, Circle, Patna. 4. The Electrical Executive Engineer, Transmission Sub Division, Khagaul, Punaichak, Patna. 5. The Accounts Officer, Transmission, Circle, Patna. .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== With Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.6157 of 2007 ====================================================== Brij Nandan Singh son of Sri Sheo Pujari Singh, quarter no.3A DVC Colony, Jakkanpur P.S. Gardanibagh, Patrna .... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The Chairman Through the Secretary Bihar State Electricity Board, Patna 2. The General Manager cum Chief Engineer, Transmission Zone-III, Gaya 3. The Electrical Superintending Engineer Transmission Circle Patna 4. the Electrical Engineer, Transmission Sub Division Khagaul, Punaichak, Patna 5. The Accounts Officer, Transmission Circle Patna ... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KISHORE KUMAR MANDAL ORAL ORDER 3 14-05-2014 Although the matter has been listed for consideration of MJC No. 3955 of 2013 seeking restoration of CWJC No. 6157 of 2007, both sides agreed that after allowing the MJC application the writ application itself be disposed of. Patna High Court MJC No.3955 of 2013 (3) dt.14-05-2014 2 / 2 2 Having heard the parties, MJC No.3955 of 2013 is allowed and order dated 12.10.2011 passed in CWJC No. 6157 of 2007 is recalled. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the respondent erstwhile Bihar State Electricity Board (now South Bihar Power Holding Distribution Company Ltd. for short ‘the Company’). The petitioner claim payment of full over-time allowance for diverse periods on the basis of salary admissible to the petitioner plus D.A. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondents. In paragraph 8 thereof it has been stated that admissible dues under the said head have already been sanctioned and paid to the petitioner. Remaining claim of the petitioner has however, been denied. Counsel for the petitioner after making submissions at some length submits that the petitioner be granted liberty to raise the grievance before the Managing Director of the Company who may be directed to consider the same. The application is disposed of permitting the petitioner to make an application before the Managing Director of the Company ventilating his grievance. If any such application is filed, the said respondent would consider and dispose of the same in accordance with law. Let it be recorded that this Court has not gone into the merit of the claim of the petitioner that he would still be entitled to some more payment under those head(s). HR/- (Kishore Kumar Mandal, J)