IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.8849 of 2010 JHAMAN PRASAD SINGH SON OF LATE GANESH SINGH, RESIDENT OF HARE KRISHNA COLONY, IN FRONT OF POLICE CHOWKI NO.3, CIVIL LINES, G.T. ROAD, SASARAM, P.S. SASARAM TOWN, DISTRICT- ROHTAS Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE SECRETARY, ROAD CONSTRUCTION DEPARTMENT, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA 3. THE JOINT SECRETARY, ROAD CONSTRUCTION DEPARTMENT, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA 4. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, ROAD CONSTRUCTION DEPARTMENT, BUILDING DIVISION, SASARAM (ROHTAS) DIVISION, ROHTAS 5. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, ROAD CONSTRUCTION DEPARTMENT, BUILDING DIVISION, KAIMUR AT BHABHUA 6. THE ACCOUNTANT GENERAL, BIHAR, PATNA ----------- 2 19.05.2010 Heard learned counsels for the petitioner, the State and the Accountant General. The grievance of the petitioner is that upon his superannuation on 31st March, 2000 from the post of Assistant Engineer under the office of the respondent no.5, he is not being paid his full pension and gratuity as he was sanctioned only 90 % as per the memo no. 2006(S) dated 26th March, 2001 as contained in Annexure-6. It is submitted that a sum of rupees ninety one thousand and odd was recovered from the gratuity of the petitioner allegedly on the ground that the advance given by him to the concerned Junior Engineers have remained not adjusted. Learned counsel further submits that the above ground for recovery is not correct since some of the Junior Engineers had adjusted the amount and an amount of rupees nine thousand and odd which was outstanding is coming from before while the predecessor in the office of the petitioner was holding the post. - 2 - Learned counsel appearing for the respondent-State submits that from the averments made in the writ application as also the annexure it is not clear as to the adjustment said to have been made by the concerned Junior Engineer, however the claims of the petitioner shall be considered without delay as per law. In the above circumstances, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that for expeditious disposal of the pending claims as highlighted in this writ application, petitioner proposes to file a representation before the respondent no.5 with a copy to the respondent no.3. In such view of the matter, in case such representation stating details of unpaid claims is filed by the petitioner within a period of eight weeks from today along with the certified copy of the present order as also the copy of the relevant documents, if any, in support of the claim, the grievances of the petitioner raised in the representation shall be considered in accordance with law expeditiously preferably within a period of six months on receipt of such representation so that the grievances of the petitioner could be settled without delay and upon consideration the admitted dues found payable could also be paid to the petitioner along with interest permissible under the rules. The writ application stands disposed of with the above observations/directions. Manish/- ( Shailesh Kumar Sinha,J.)