IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.8517 of 2005 NAGESHWAR PANDIT Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 03/ 09.03.2010 Mr. Vinod Shankar Modi, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Manoj Kumar Jha, assisting counsel to G.A. 1 and Mr. J.P. Karn for the Accountant General. The petitioner who superannuated from the post of Headmaster with effect from 31.3.2003 has filed the writ petition for payment of his unutilized leave salary of 199 days pursuant to the sanction order contained in Memo No. 158 dated 5.3.2005 (Annexure-2) issued by the Under Secretary, Human Resources Department, Government of Bihar. It so appears that despite the said sanction of unutilized leave salary of the petitioner to 199 days the Accountant General authorized the payment only to the extent of 100 days and pursuant whereto payments were made to the petitioner to the tune of Rs. 67,577/- as is apparent from the letter dated 391 dated 20.5.2006 as contained in Annexure-A of the counter affidavit of respondent no. 5. It also appears that the salary of the strike period from 1.1.1999 to 7.5.1999 amounting to Rs. 69,137/- was also authorized by the Accountant General vide authority slip no. 1278 dated 22.09.2005 and pursuant whereto the said payments were made to the petitioner. However, the reasons of objection of curtailment of the unutilized leave 2 salary of the petitioner from 199 days to 100 days are not known as no counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the Accountant General. In the circumstances that the period of 1.1.1999 to 7.5.1999 being the strike period has since been authorized by the Accountant General as being regular service period and the salary amount have been paid to the petitioner, I think it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition with a liberty to the petitioner to raise his claim of payment of the balance amount of 99 days of unutilized leave salary in the light of the sanction order dated 5.3.2005 as contained in Annexure-2 before the Under Secretary, Government of Bihar and who shall consider and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law and if the said amount is found admissible to the petitioner then he would issue a fresh sanction order and seek fresh authorization from the Accountant General for its payment. However, if the claim is not found admissible it should be rejected by a speaking order. As it is an old case it is expected that the authorities of the State of Bihar and the Accountant General would endeavour to compete the entire exercise within a period of three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. The writ petition stands disposed of. S.Sb/- (Jyoti Saran, J.)