IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.11791 of 2003 SRI DEOBANSH TIWARY Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 05 16.03.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. No counter affidavit has been filed despite the order dated 4.2.2009. In the given nature of the controversy and the order to be passed, this Court does not consider it prudent to adjourn the mater any further for that purpose. The petitioner retired from the Irrigation Department holding the post of Drill Man. His grievance is that G.P.F. amount were deducted from his salary during his service period in between 1.1.1981 to 31.12.1985, 21.9.1986 to 10.7.1987 and 14.7.1987 to 22.6.1993. Nevertheless, this deduction was not credited to his G.P.F. account “R.O.H./R.B.P. 1501”. His further grievance is that Group Insurance amount has also not been paid despite his superannuation from service. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that subsequently the G.P.F. amount deducted for the period 1.1.1981 to 31.12.1985 has been credited to his Account. The order-sheet of the present proceedings demonstrates that this writ petition filed in the year, 2003 2 came to be dismissed for non-prosecution in the year, 2004, and it was then restored. The petitioner is stated to have filed representation with regard to his grievance as appended as Annexure-2 series. If any amounts were deducted from his salary towards G.P.F. or Group Insurance, those deductions were the property of the petitioner and he is entitled to due credit of the same as otherwise non- crediting the same to his account after deduction becomes a clear case of defalcation. The respondents are, therefore, directed to examine the deductions as claimed by the petitioner both under the G.P.F. and Group Insurance heads from his salary and not credited to his account and pass appropriate orders in respect thereof with all necessary consequences within a maximum period of four months from the date of receipt and/or production of a copy of this order. For that purpose, the petitioner is granted liberty to file a proper detailed representation, if so advised. The writ application stands disposed. P.K. (Navin Sinha, J.)