IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.1170 of 2011 Satya Narayan Mandal Versus The State Of Bihar & Ors. ----------------- 04. 19.10.2011 Heard Mr. Nityanand, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, Mr. D. Choudhary, Assisting counsel to A.A.G. 13 for the State and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the University. The writ petition was disposed of with the direction to the petitioner to present himself before the respondent no. 4 i.e. the Registrar of the respondent-University together with the copy of the order passed by the court, the family genealogy as well as the indemnity bond requiring him to indemnify in case of there being any counter claim. Upon submission of the aforesaid paper the Registrar of the University was required to take prompt steps for making the payment of the pending retiral dues admissible to the father of the petitioner together with interest. As the action on the part of the respondent-University was not forthcoming, hence the contempt application was filed. A supplementary show cause and a second supplementary show cause has been filed demonstrating compliance of the directions by this Court. It is contended that the details of the payment has been more elaborately dealt by the opposite party no. 4, the Registrar of the University in the supplementary show cause filed on 7.9.2011. In paragraph 3 of the said show cause a statement has been made that an amount of Rs. 1,69,217/- found 2 admissible to the petitioner towards arrears of pension/family pension and gratuity has been paid to him. In paragraph 4 thereof it is further stated that as the father of the petitioner was a member of the contributory provident fund, he after seeking permission of the University, has withdrawn the amount admissible to him under the contributory provident fund and thus the account has since been closed on 23.6.1995. It is stated that a further amount of Rs. 62543/- by way of interest on belated payment of pension/family pension has been paid to the petitioner for the period 1.1.2005 to 30.5.2011 calculated @ 6 % vide cheque no. 639681 dated 22.8.2011. In paragraph 5 of the show cause it is mentioned that the leave encashment amount was paid to the father of the petitioner on 28.10.1997, the group insurance amount on 8.7.1996 and the amount towards employees welfare fund on 17.9.1994. It is further stated that an excess salary to the tune of Rs. 11,176/- was made to the father of the petitioner and which stands recoverable. It is thus contended that the respondent-University in obedience of the direction of this Court and upon consideration of the pending claims of the petitioner, has disposed of the same by making payment of the amount as found admissible to the petitioner. Mr. Nityanand, leaned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner disputes the calculations in the light of the counter affidavit filed in the writ petition. Considering the circumstances that this Court while disposing of the writ petition had directed the University to examine the claim of the petitioner and make payment thereof and in 3 compliance whereof the payment has since been made by the University to the petitioner, any dispute being raised by the petitioner before this Court as regarding the quantum of payment may be raised by him before the authority concerned together with supportive documents and calculations and which may be considered and disposed of in accordance with law. With the aforesaid observations the contempt application is disposed of. S.Sb/- (Jyoti Saran, J.)