IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.16229 of 2004 PRABHU NATH SINGH, son of late Ramashish Singh, resident of village – Ekderwa, P.O. + P.S. – Thawe, District – Gopalganj ……… Petitioner Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR through the Secretary, Human Resources, Government of Bihar , Patna. 2. The Director, Primary Education, Bihar, Patna. 3. The Accountant General, Bihar, Patna. 4. The District Superintendent of Education, Gopalganj. 5. The District Provident Fund Officer, Gopalganj. 6. The District Account Officer, Gopalganj. 7. The District Treasury Officer, Gopalganj. …………… Respondents. ----------- 04. 27.01.2009 As per the counter affidavit filed on behalf of respondent no.5 the difference of salary for the period 1.3.71 to 31.3.73 was paid on 14.5.2005 as per the statement made in para 7 vide cheque no. 417399. Counsel for the petitioner submits that calculation annexed with annexure C/1 shows that the interest has been calculated only till 24.10.1994. His contention is that interest must be calculated till the date of payment and there is no explanation why interest has only been paid till 24.10.1994. There is no cogent explanation coming from the respondents in this regard. The District Superintendent of Education, Gopalganj is hereby directed to verify the records as to why interest has been calculated only till 1994 when actual payment has been on 14.5.1995. If there is no basis for not adding up the rest of the period then he shall take steps to see that the balance interest amount is worked out and paid to the petitioner. With regard to the grievance of the petitioner of payment of - 2 - interest on GPF between December, 1976 to March, 1984, the averment of the respondents is that interest has been paid for the period only upto six months when the formal application was made and not thereafter because there is no provision for payment of interest for the gap period. Since this legal question is awaiting final decision of the Division Bench , therefore, this Court is not willing to pass any order on this issue. But once the Division Bench renders its decision on this issue, petitioner has liberty to reassert his claim dependant on the opinion of the Division Bench. The writ application is disposed of with a direction upon the District Superintendent of Education as above to do the needful within a period of three months from the date of communication/production of a copy of this order. If the petitioner has any doubt about the calculation of the GPF he has liberty to sit with the District Provident Officer and settle the account and the discrepancy and the District Provident Officer will be obliged to do the needful on the cogent material furnished by the petitioner within the time-frame i.e. three months. rkp (Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J)