IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.18915 of 2008 LAGAN DEO SINGH SON OF LATE HEERA SINGH RESIDENT OF VILLAGE ANDAUL, P.O. BIRAHIMA BAZAR, POLICE STATION BARURAJ, DISTRICT – MUZUFFARPUR. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE SECRETARY CUM-COMMISSIONER, MINOR IRRIGATION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA. 3. THE SECRETARY CUM- COMMISSIONER, FINANCE DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA. 4. THE ACCOUNTANT GENERAL, BIHAR BIRCHAND PATEL MARG, PATNA. 5. THE CHIEF ENGINEER, TUBE WELL MINOR IRRIGATION DEPARTMENT MUZUFFARPUR. 6. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, TUBE WELL DIVISION, BETTIAH. 7. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, TUBE WELL DIVISION, MUZUFFARPUR. 8. THE DISTRICT PROVIDENT FUND OFFICER, MOTIHARI9. 9. THE TREASURY OFFICER, MOTIHARI, DISTRICT – East champaran ----------- 02. 16.02.2010 As prayed for, Treasurry Officer, Motihari, District – East Champaran be added as respondent no. 9. Heard the parties. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner retired on 31st January 1993, as Fourth Grade Employees while working in the office of respondent no. 6, he could not received of his retiral dues. As a matter of fact, no provident fund dues have been paid to the petitioner till date. He further submits that during the pendency of 2 this writ application, the pension of the petitioner was revised by the Accountant General, Bihar, Patna as per letter no. Pen- 1511209152817/252865P1 dated 13th of February 2009 as contained in Annexure-3 to the supplementary affidavit wheryby pension of the petitioner was revised or refixed at Rs. 1619/- with effect from 01.04.1997. Petitioner has not received the revised amount of pension despite representation. Mr. J.P. Karan Sr. Advocate, appearing on behalf of the Accountant General submits that since the necessary authorization for refixation of pension has been issued and as such, petitioner can have no grievance from the office of Accountant General. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent- State submits that the grievance of the petitioner with regard to provident fund dues as also the pension as revised by the Accountant General shall be looked into without delay as per law. In the above circumstances, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that for expeditious disposal of his unpaid claims, petitioner proposes to file a representation before the respondent no. 9. (The Treasury Officer, Motihari, District – East Champaran). In such view of the matter, in case such representation giving specific claims is filed by the 3 petitioner within a period of four weeks along with the certified copy of the present order as also the copy of the relevant documents in support of the claim, the respondent no. 9. (The Treasury Officer, Motihari, District – East Champaran) shall consider each of the claims raised by the petitioner in his representation in accordance with law expeditiously, preferably within a period of four months on receipt of such representation so that the admissible amount on account of revision of pension as authorized by the Accountant General as contained in Annexure -3 shall be paid without further delay. As regards the claim for payment of provident fund dues, petitioner proposes to file a representation before the respondent no. 8 (The District Provident Fund Officer, Motihari) within the same period of four weeks along with the certified copy of the present order as also the copy of the relevant documents in support of the claim. In case, such representation is filed, respondent no. 8 shall consider the grievances of the petitioner with regard to the provident fund dues. On consideration, if the representation of the petitioner is accepted, the admissible dues shall also be paid to the petitioner with statutory interest. 4 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that for redressal of his grievance with regard to the interest over the delayed payment of the revision of pension, petitioner proposes to file a representation before the respondent no. 6 stating details of his claims which shall also be considered as per law. However, if any of the claims or any part of the claims is not found admissible, the same shall be informed to the petitioner with the reasons thereof. The writ application stands disposed of with the above observations/directions. Jagdish ( Shailesh Kumar Sinha, J.)