IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.9732 of 2004 BADRI NARAIN JHA SON OF LATE BASUDEO JHA, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE AND POST- BHAWANIPUR, P.S. BIRAUL, DISTRICT- DARBHANGA, RETIRED PRINCIPAL OF GOVERNMENT POLYTECHNIC DHANBAD AND DUMKA – PETITIONER. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA EX- OFFICIO CHAIRMAN OF POLYTECHNIC COMPETITIVE ENTRANCE EXAMINATION 1999-2000. 3. THE ADDITIONAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, MEMBER SECRETARY OF P.C.E.E. EXAMINATION 1999- 2000. ----------- 7/ 07-04-2011 Heard the parties. 2. The petitioner has filed the present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a direction upon the respondents for payment of admitted remuneration for the works done by him as a member of the Polytechnic Competitive Entrance Examination (P.C.E.E.), 1990-2000. According to the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, while the petitioner was posted and working as the Principal, Government Polytechnic, Dhanbad, he was appointed as educationist member of the said polytechnic competitive Entrance Examination Committee, constituted by the respondent State by a notification dated 01.07.1999. The aforesaid committee was headed by respondent no.2, as the Chairman. 3. It is admitted case of the parties that the 2 petitioner had discharged his duty as a member of said committee during the relevant period and, accordingly, he submitted different bills of total amount of Rs. 63,795. 38 towards his honorarium, daily allowances and other admissible expenditures. A calculation chart showing his entitlement has been brought on record as Annexure-6 to the writ petition. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that admittedly the petitioner has discharged his duty and is entitled for the allowances and honorarium for which he had submitted bills, but the respondents have not reimbursed the aforesaid bills till date. 4. A counter-affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondent no. 2 and 3, wherein it has been admitted that the petitioner had discharged his duty as a member for the said Committee from July, 1999 to June, 2000 and bills to the tune of Rs. 37,920/- were prepared for payment of remuneration and other admissible dues of the petitioner. Statement has been made in paragraph-9 of the counter- affidavit that the aforesaid amount of Rs. 37,920/- has been paid to the petitioner as honorarium and his further claim was rejected. 5. A reply to the aforesaid counter-affidavit has been filed on behalf of the petitioner, wherein it has been asserted that as a matter of fact, on proper calculation of the admissible dues, the petitioner shall be entitled to 3 receive a sum of Rs. 63,795/- and not only Rs. 37,920/-. It has been asserted that the calculation made by the respondents is apparently wrong, and even the aforesaid amount of Rs. 37,920/- has not been received by the petitioner till date. 6. After having heard the parties and in the factual backdrop of the case, this Court is of the considered opinion that entire matter is required to be re- examined by the Secretary, Department of Science and Technology, Government of Bihar (respondent no.2), who was admittedly working as Chairman of Polytechnic Competitive Entrance Examination in the year 1999- 2000 and the petitioner was working as a Member of that Committee. He shall be obliged to look into the grievances of the petitioner and shall decide his claim by a speaking order, after giving an opportunity of hearing to him and an opportunity to place all his claims showing his entitlement for the honorarium and other dues. 7. Accordingly, the petitioner is hereby directed to appear before respondent no.2 with a detailed representation and a copy of the present order raising his grievances about non-payment of his admitted dues and further raising his grievances that proper calculation has not been made by the authorities for reimbursement of his admitted dues for the works done by him for the said 4 examination. If the petitioner appears before respondent no.2 within a period of four weeks from today with a detailed representation and a certified copy of the present order, respondent no.2 shall be obliged to decide his claim within two months from the date of filing of such representation. Respondent no.2 shall also ensure that the amount fixed by him on the basis of fresh calculation made by the competent authority be paid to the petitioner within the aforesaid period of two months. It is made clear that if the petitioner does not appear before respondent no.2 with a detailed representation and a certified copy of the present order, within the time prescribed, then it shall be construed that the writ petition has finally been rejected by this Court. With the aforesaid observations/directions, the writ petition stands disposed of. BTiwary/ ( Birendra Prasad Verma, J.)