IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.7276 of 2005 Mithila Nand Sharma son of Late Kameshwar Sharma, resident of village- Beharari, P.O.-Kiyotna, P.S.-Ghoghardiha, District-Madhubani. ……..Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. The Commissioner-cum-Secretary, Water Resources Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. 3. The Deputy Secretary, Water Resources Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. 4. The Under Secretary, Water Resources Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. 5. The Chief Engineer(Mechanical) Water Resources Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. 6. The Superintending Engineer(Mechanical Circle ), Koshi Project, Bihar, District-Supaul. 7. The Executive Engineer(Mechanical)Division No. 2, Koshi Project, Birpur, Supaul. 8. The District Provident Fund Officer, Supaul. 9. The Director, Provident Fund, Government of Bihar, Patna Bhawan, Bihar, Patna. 10. The Accountant General, Bihar, Patna. ----------- For the Petitioner : Mr. Shailesh Kumar Sharma For the State : A.J.C. to G.A. V For the Accountant General : Dr. Maynand Jha, J.C. to Sri. Jagannath Jha ----------- 02. 20.03.2009 The dispute or the issue according to the petitioner goes down to three areas. One that a sum of Rs. 10,442/- was ordered to be deposited by the respondents because the petitioner is alleged to have overstayed the official accommodation from 01.08.2003 to 31.12.2004 after his retirement. Respondents therefore decided to charge penal rent and recover the 2 above amount. The second aspect for which the petitioner is raising his grievances is that the respondent Provident Fund Authorities have not provided the calculation chart to him, therefore it is difficult for him to verify whether the payment made to him is in consonance with the correct state of affairs. Petitioner also wants a direction that the due be paid with the statutory interest on the G.P.F. amount up till the date of actual payment. With regard to the first aspect of realization of penal rent of the petitioner is concerned, learned counsel for the petitioner has brought to my notice a decision rendered in the case of Brij Nandan Prasad versus The State of Bihar and others since reported in 2004(3) P.L.J.R. 254 that in matters of delay of settlement of pension, it is unreasonable on the part of the respondents to demand penal rent for overstaying in official accommodation. The case of the petitioner seems to be covered by the said decision. In that view of the matter the order dated 03.09.2005 passed by the Executive Engineer (Mechanical) contained in Annexure-4 is hereby quashed. A direction is hereby issued upon the District Provident Fund Officer, Supaul that he shall furnish the settlement of accounts of the G.P.F. of the 3 petitioner within a period of three months from the date of production of the copy of this order. As far as the claim of the statutory interest on the G.P.F. amount till the date of payment is concerned, the petitioner has to await the decision of the division Bench in this regard which is the case of Ram Pavittar Singh. The writ application with the above observations and directions stands disposed of. Shageer (Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J)