IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.14754 of 2008 Phudena Kuwar, W/o Late Nageshwar Singh, R/o Village – Sirsiya Jagdish, Via – Birahima Bazar, P.S. – Kathaiya, District – Muzaffarpur. --------- Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Bihar. 2. The District Superintendent of Education, Muzaffarpur. 3. The Treasury Officer, Muzaffarpur. 4. The Provident Officer, Muzaffarpur. 5. The Accountant General, Bihar, Patna. ------- Respondents ---------------------------------- 2 30.11.2011 Heard Sri Vijay Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Ram Shankar Prasad, learned A.C. to Government Pleader No. 7, appearing on behalf of all the Respondents. The writ petition was filed with a prayer to direct the Respondents to pay amount of G.P.F. of husband of the petitioner, who died while he was posted as ‘Assistant Teacher’ in Nationalized Primary School, Gidha, Motipur, in the district of Muzaffarpur on 12.12.2005. The petitioner in the writ petition has further prayed for directing the Respondents to grant Senior Selection Grade Scale to the husband of the petitioner. However, at the time of hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner has confined prayer for grant of statutory interest on delayed payment of G.P.F. amount. In this case a counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of Respondent No. 4 /Provident Officer, Muzaffarpur and it has been indicated that G.P.F. amount of husband of the petitioner has already been paid during the pendency of the writ petition along with admissible statutory interest. The petitioner has filed rejoinder to the counter affidavit and it has been pleaded that the calculation 2 chart enclosed with the counter affidavit makes it clear that interest on G.P.F. amount of the husband of the petitioner has been calculated and paid only for six months. Of-course rejoinder to the counter affidavit has been filed but no specific statement has been made to demonstrate that interest has not been calculated correctly whereas learned counsel for the State has drawn my attention to ‘Annexure – D’ at page 20 to the counter affidavit of Respondent No. 4 and submits that interest was calculated till the year 2009. It was submitted that interest has been paid correctly. In view of dispute which has been raised by the parties, the court is of the opinion that issue regarding claim of interest cannot be decided by this court while exercising writ jurisdiction. The writ petition stands disposed of. However, if so advised, the petitioner may file proper representation before the Respondent No. 4 regarding the claim of interest. If such representation is filed, the court expects that the Respondent No. 4 will examine the same in accordance with law and pass appropriate order within four months from the date of filing of such representation. If he considers the claim of the petitioner as genuine, he may pass order for payment within aforesaid time. With above observation and direction the writ petition stands disposed of. Praful ( Rakesh Kumar, J.)