IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.16926 of 2009 GOPAL DUTT SHUKLA S/O LATE RAMNATH SHUKLA R/O VILL- BAGOARA, P.S- DARAUNDA, DISTT- SIWAN Versus 1. THE BIHAR STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION THROUGH ITS ADMINISTRATOR, BIRCHAND PATEL PATH, PATNA 2. THE ADMINISTRATOR, BIHAR STATE ROAD, TRANSPORT CORPORATION PARIVAHAN BHAWAN, BEERCHAND PATEL PATH, PATNA 3. THE CHIEF OF THE OPERATION THEN SRI SASHI RANJAN PRASAD SINGH, THE BIHAR STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, PARIVAHAN BHAWAN BEERCHAND PATEL PATH, PATNA 4. THE EX-CHIEF OF THE ADMINISTRATION null SRI SUKHDEO CHAUDHARY, B.S.R.T.C., PATNA 5. THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER, MUZAFFARPUR, DIVISION, BIHAR STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION 6. SRI G.S. KANG, EX- ADMINISTRATOR, B.S.R.T.C., PATNA 7. DILIP KUMAR VERMA THE THEN DIVISIONAL MANAGER, MUZAFFARPUR, DIVISION, BIHAR STATE ROAD, TRANSPORT CORPORATION ----------- 06. 25.01.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the counsel for the Bihar State Road Transport Corporation(hereinafter referred to as the “Corporation”). 2. Petitioner was compulsorily retired from the service of the Corporation. He challenged the order of compulsory retirement before this Court which was dismissed, whereafter petitioner moved the Division Bench of this Court. The Division Bench also dismissed the appeal as withdrawn so as to enable the petitioner to avail the remedy of review. 3. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that he approached the authorities of the Corporation and the authorities reinstated him under order dated 28.11.2007 Annexure-5, whereafter misconduct alleged against the petitioner was inquired into and he has been exonerated of the charges levelled against him, so submitted learned counsel for the petitioner Sri Yogesh Chandra Verma, Sr. - 2 - Advocate. On the basis of the order of reinstatement and subsequent exoneration learned counsel submitted that this Court should direct the authorities of the Corporation to pay the petitioner salary and other consequential benefits coming from the order of exoneration for the period he was out of service. For such consequential benefit in my opinion, petitioner should approach the Administrator of the Corporation, who has reinstated him under order dated 28.11.2007, Annexure-5 as also exonerated him of the charges levelled against him by a subsequent order. 4. Let the petitioner file representation before the Administrator of the Corporation, who should consider and dispose of the same in accordance with law as early as possible, in any case within two months from the date of receipt of the representation of the petitioner along with a copy of this order. 5. This writ application is, accordingly, disposed of. Rajesh/ (V.N.Sinha, J.)