IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.10186 of 2010 SURAJ DEO SAO SON OF LATE HIRA SAO RESIDENT OF VILLAGE AASPURA, P.S. AND P.O. BIKRAM DISTRICT PATNA. Versus 1. THE BIHAR STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD THROUGH ITS CHAIRMAN (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO THE ELECTRICITY BOARD). 2. THE CHAIRMAN, BIHAR STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, VIDYUT BHAWAN, PATNA. 3. THE SECRETARY, BIHAR STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, VIDYUT BHAWAN, PATNA. 4. THE JOINT SECRETARY, BIHAR STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, VIDYUT BHAWAN, PATNA. 5. THE FINANCE CONTROLLER (ACCOUNTS) BIHAR STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, VIDYUT BHAWAN, PATNA. 6. THE GENERAL MANAGER-CUM-CHIEF ENGINEER, CENTRAL BIHAR AREA, ELECTRICITY BOARD, PATNA. 7. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR ACCOUNTS, CENTRAL BIHAR AREA, ELECTRICITY BOARD, PATNA. 8. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR (PERSONNEL) CENTRAL ELECTRIC SUPPLY AREA, PATNA. 9. THE ELECTRICAL SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, ELECTRIC CIRCLE, PATNA. 10. THE ELECTRTICAL EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, ELECTRIC SUPPLY DIVISION, BARH. 11. THE ELECTRICAL EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, ELECTRIC SUPPLY DIVISION, BIHTA. 12. THE ASSISTANT ELECTRICAL ENGINEER, ELECTRIC SUPPLY SUB DIVISION, BIKRAM. ----------- 2 05.07.2010 Heard learned counsels for the petitioner and the respondent–Board. The grievance of the petitioner is that upon his superannuation on 31ST of October 1991, although the retiral dues have been paid, however, the additional gratuity amount of Rs. 78,235 though sanctioned as per 2 Annexure-3 but the same has not been paid as yet. Besides the above, the gratuity which was paid to the petitioner for a sum of Rs.65,468/- that too was not properly calculated considering the length of service. It is further submitted that the G.P.F. and group insurance have been paid to the petitioner after long delay, as such, petitioner is entitled to payment of interest as well. It is further submitted petitioner has represented his grievance by filing a representation, however, the same has not been considered as yet. Learned counsel for the respondent-Board submits that the additional gratuity has been paid to all the retired employees, however, the claim of the petitioner shall be verified and if the same is found not paid the same shall be paid without further delay. In the above circumstances, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that for expeditious disposal of the pending claims, petitioner proposes to file a representation before the respondent no. 6. In such view of the matter, in case such representation stating details of unpaid claims is filed by the petitioner within a period of four weeks 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 above respondent shall consider the claims of the 3 petitioner as raised in the representation in accordance with law expeditiously, preferably within a period of three months on receipt of such representation so that the grievances of the petitioner could be settled without delay and the admitted dues found payable could also be paid along with interest permissible under the rules. While considering the representation of the petitioner, the claim of the petitioner for payment of reasonable interest on account of delayed payment of GPF and GSS may also be considered. The writ application stands disposed of with the above observations/directions. Jagdish/ ( Shailesh Kumar Sinha, J.)