IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.3164 of 2007 1.Md. Shaquil Akhtar, son of Md. Serajuddin, Assistant Operator, 132/23 K.V. Grid, Sub- station, Bari Pahari, P.S. Biharsharif, Distt. Nalanda. 2. Nawal Kishore Singh, son of late Dwarika Singh, 220/132 Suer Grid, P.O. Ramna Bigha, District- Nalanda 3.Arun Kumar, Retd. Assistant Operator, 132/33 K.V. Grid, Sub-station, Hospital Road Bari Pahari, P.S. Biharsharif, Distt. Nalanda --- Petitioners. Versus 1. The Chairman, Bihar State Electricity Board, Baily Road, Patna. 2. The General Manager-cum- Chief Engineer, Bihar State Electricity Board, Transmission Zone (3), Chandauli, Gaya. 3. The Superintending Engineer, Bihar State Electricity Board Transmission Circle, Biharsharif, Ranabigha, Nalanda. 4. The Electrical Executive Engineer, Bihar State Electricity Board, Transmission Division, Biharsharif, P.O. Ranabigha, District- Nalanda. --------- 2. 1.10.2008 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Junior Counsel to Mr. Dharmesh Mishra, Governemtn Advocate for the respondents. The three petitioners, namely, Md. Shaquil Akhtar, Nawal Kishore Singh and Arun Kumar have jointly preferred this writ petition for identical reliefs, namely, payment of overtime allowance.The respondents have placed on record their counter affidavit. We have perused the materials on record and considered 2 the submission of learned counsel for the parties. It appears that petitioner no.1 (Md. Shaquil Akhtar) is in the service of respondent Bihar State Electricity Board as Assistant Operator. He raises a grievance that he had worked for 2568 hours’ over-time and desired payment of over-time allowance accordingly. Perhaps the same remained un-attended with the Board, leading to C.W.J.C. No. 8973 of 2003( Mohammad Sakil Akhtar & Ors. Vs. The Chairman, Bihar State Electricity Board & Ors.). The same was disposed of by order dated 2.3.2005, whereby the authorities were directed to consider the grievance of the petitioner and dispose of the same by a reasoned order within a period of three months, and make payment within six weeks thereafter if their claim is found admissible. The respondents authorities have accordingly considered the petitioner’s claim and found that he had worked for 1282 hours over-time, and the allowance was sanctioned and paid by order dated 16.1.2008(Annexure A series). The petitioner no.2 (Nawal Kishore Singh)raised the grievances for payment of 3708 hours, and the respondent authorities have sanctioned and paid over-time allowance for 2668 hours, vide order dated 16.1.2008(Annexure-A series). Similarly petitioner no.3( Arun Kumar ) raised grievances for payment of 2600 hours overtime, and the respondent authorities have sanctioned and paid for 998 hours, vide order dated 16.1.2008(Annexure-A series). It appears that the grievances of the three petitioners 3 have been redressed. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. Vinay/ ( S. K. Katriar , J.)