IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.10730 of 2006 ANANDI PD. JHA, S/o Late Phul Kumar Jha, Resident of Village-Bhumihara, P.O.- Parmanandpur, P.S.- Shambhuganj, District – Banka. ….. Petitioner Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. The A.G. Bihar, Patna. 3. The District Education Officer, Bhagalpur. 4. The Provident Fund Officer, Bhagalpur. 5. The Treasury Officer, Bhagalpur. ……… Respondents ----------- 3 06.04.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Rakesh Kumar Singh, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent no. 2/Accountant General. None appeared on behalf of the State. The petitioner has claimed that interest was not properly calculated on the G.P.F. amount. In this case, counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondent no. 4/District Provident Fund Officer, Bhagalpur, wherein, it has been stated that earlier Rs. 2,57,997/- was authorized, and subsequently it was re-examined and further authorization for Rs. 5,457/- was issued on 19.09.2006. Learned counsel for the petitioner disputes the calculation and it was submitted that petitioner may be granted liberty to file a fresh representation before respondent no. 4. In absence of learned counsel for the State, the writ petition stands disposed of, granting liberty to the petitioner, to file a fresh representation before respondent no. 4, and if such representation is filed, it is expected, that respondent no. 4, will 2 examine the same and pass appropriate order, in accordance with law, preferably, within a period of three months from the date of filing of such representation. Praful (Rakesh Kumar, J.)