IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2400 of 2008 Shatrughan Jha, Son of Late Balbhadra Jha, resident of Village- Dwarikapur, Police Station-Sakra, District-Muzaffarpur --- Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. The Accountant General, Bihar, Patna 3. The Director ,Land Acquisition, Water Resources Department, Bihar, Patna 4. The Special Land Acquisition Officer, Gandak Project, Muzaffarpur 5. The District Provident Fund Officer, Muzaffarpur, 6. The Treasury Officer, Muzaffarpur ----------- Respondents. ---------------------------------- 03 12-08-2011 Heard Sri Ranjan Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Respondent nos.1, 3 to 6/ State and Sri J.P.Karn, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of Respondent no.2/ Accountant General, Bihar, Patna. The present writ petition was filed in the year 2007 with a prayer to direct the Respondents to clear his retiral dues. In this case, a counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of Respondent no.4, which was sworn on 8.9.2008 and filed on 22nd March, 2010. In the counter affidavit, Respondent no.4 has made a categorical statement that almost all the retiral dues of the petitioner have already been cleared. So far revision of pension is concerned, in paragraph-8 of the counter affidavit it has been stated that a proposal in this regard has already been sent to the Accountant General, Bihar, Patna vide office letter no.1817 dated 11.8.2008. Neither learned counsel for the petitioner nor learned counsel for the Respondents are in position to inform the Court as to whether authorization by the office of the Accountant General has been 2 issued or not. Learned counsel for the petitioner makes a prayer for disposal of the writ petition granting liberty to the petitioner to file representation if grievance in relation to revision of pension has not been redressed. In view of the stand taken by learned counsel for the parties, there is no need to keep the matter further pending. The writ petition stands disposed of granting liberty to the petitioner to file a detailed representation before Respondent nos. 2 and 4 if any grievance still exists. If such representation is filed by the petitioner, the Court expects that both the Respondents will examine the same and pass appropriate order in accordance with law redressing the grievance of the petitioner within a period of three months from the date of filing of such representation. With above observation and direction, the writ petition stands disposed of. NKS/- ( Rakesh Kumar, J.)