IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.3844 of 2011 GOURI SHANKAR, S/O LATE MOHAN RAM, RESIDENT OF MOHA- RAM KRISHNA PATH, SRI KRISHNAPURI, P.S. SHRI KRISHNAPURI, P.O. PATLIPUTRA, DISTT- PATNA. ... ... PETITIONER. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, CO- OPERATIVE BIHAR, PATNA. 2. BIHAR STATE COOPERATIVE BANK LTD. ASHOK RAJ PATH, PATNA-4 THROUGH ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR. 3. MANAGING DIRECTOR, BIHAR STATE COOPERATIVE BANK LTD. ASHOK RAJ PATH, PATNA-4. 4. DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGER, PERSONNEL & ADMINISTRATION, BIHAR STATE COOPERATIVE BANK LTD., PATNA-4. ... ... RESPONDENTS. ----------- 2. 3.3.2011. Heard Shri Ram Janam Prasad, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri K.K.Sinha, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent nos.2, 3 and 4 as well as Shri Rakesh Singh, learned A.C. to G.A.1 appearing on behalf of the respondent no.1/State. The present writ petition has been filed with a prayer to direct the respondents, particularly respondent no.2 to make payment of statutory interest for the period of delay in payment of residual amount of Gratuity, Provident Fund and leave salary of the petitioner as per revised last pay of the petitioner paid in obedience to the orders of this Court passed in C.W.J.C. No.4165 of 2005. 2 The petitioner had retired with effect from 31.7.1997 as Selection Grade Peon from the respondent/Bihar State Co- operative Bank. Earlier for retiral dues, petitioner had filed a writ petition vide C.W.J.C. No.4165 of 2005, which was disposed of by Annexure-3 on 3.8.2005 with liberty to the petitioner to file representation. Subsequently, a contempt petition was also filed vide M.J.C. No.660 of 2006. It was submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that while contempt petition was pending, Annexure-6 was issued i.e. letter no.566 dated 30.6.2006. On perusal of Annexure-6, it appears that the respondent/Bank had earlier paid Rs.8,861/- in compliance with earlier order. However, subsequently, the account was re-examined and calculated and remaining Rs.24,545/- was paid to the petitioner. The grievances of the petitioner is that the Bank had not paid statutory interest to the petitioner. The Court is of the opinion that since Annexure-6 was issued, during the pendency of the contempt petition, the 3 petitioner, had he been aggrieved with the said order, would have brought the fact of the notice of the court. After disposal of the contempt petition, the court is of the opinion that no favourable order can be passed. The petition stands dismissed. N.H./ ( Rakesh Kumar,J.)