IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.10942 of 2005 PANCHU MEHTA S/o- late Darshan Mehta, resident of North Srikrishnapuri, 40 Sadar Patel Path, P.S.-Sri Krishnapuri, District- Patna. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR through the Chief Secretary, having his office in Old Secretariat, P.S.-Sachivalaya, District- Patna. 2. The Secretary, Road Construction Department having his office in vishwesharaiya Bhawan, P.s.-Shashtri Nagar, District-Patna. 3. The Finance Commissioner, Finance Department, having his office in Old Secretariat, P.S.-Sachivalaya, District- Patna. 4. The Accountant General (A&G), Birchand Patel Path, District-Patna, Bihar. 5. The Treasury Officer, Secretariat Treasury, Vishweshraiya Bhawan, P.S.-Shashtri Nagar, District-Patna. ----------- 2 02.04.2010 Heard Mr. Rupak Kumar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State. The petitioner seeks to raise the same and similar issue as raised in C.W.J.C. No. 10985 of 2003 which was disposed of by order dated 10.2.2004 in the following terms:- “the only grievance of the petitioner now remains in the writ petition is with respect to withholding of 10% of pension and full gratuity. In view of the statement made in paragraph 6 of the supplementary counter affidavit filed on behalf of respondent no. 3 the said dues of the petitioner can be paid only after conclusion of the case against him. The writ application is thus 2 finally concluded with the liberty to the petitioner to file two pages affidavit for initiating action if the statement made in paragraph 6 is false.” Sitting in a coordinate jurisdiction, I would not be persuaded to re-examine the issue. The writ petition is not maintainable and is barred by principle of res judicata, hence it is dismissed. Bibhash (Jyoti Saran, J. )