IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.11930 of 2008 1. KRISHNA KUMAR SINGH, husband of Late Indu Kumari, resident of Gali No.10A, Mohalla- Gorakhshani, P.O./P.S. Sasaram, District Rohtas. 2. Ashirwad, aged about 20 years, son of Krishna Kumar Singh, resident of Gali No.10A, Mohalla Gorakhshani, P.O./P.S. Sasaram, District Rohtas. ---Petitioners Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR. 2. The Secretary, Higher Education Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 3. The Veer Kunwar Singh University, Arrah, through its Vice-Chancellor, V.K.S. University, Arrah. 4. The Registrar, Veer Kunwar Singh University, Arrah. ---Respondents ----------- 9. 2.2.2010 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the respondent-University. The grievance of the petitioners, who are the husband and son of the deceased employee, is that upon the death of the deceased employee in harness on 12th of October, 2007, who was working as Lecturer in the Department of Zoology, Shershah College, Sasaram, they are entitled to receive all the retiral dues. It is submitted that petitioner no.1 has been paid the proceeds of the provident fund dues pursuant to the direction of the respondent-University, as contained in letter no.208/08 dated 28th of March, 2008, as contained in Annexure 6. However, for the rest of the retiral dues, the petitioner no.1 represented the matter before the Vice- Chancellor of the University vide representation dated 30th of May, 2008, as contained in Annexure 7. However, the same has still remained unconsidered. It is further submitted that petitioner no.1 has 2 neither been paid the balance retiral dues nor has he been communicated of any decision on his representation. Learned counsel appearing for the University submits that the petitioners have neither submitted the nomination paper nor the list of the family members. As such, the rest of the claims could not be settled till date. However, it is submitted that the Principal of the College where the deceased employee was working, had made the payment of the provident fund dues, which appears to be a mistake. The learned counsel for the petitioners, on the other hand, submits that petitioner no.1, who happens to be the husband of the deceased employee, has rightly been paid the provident fund dues. It is further submitted that the fact that petitioner no.1 is the husband of deceased employee is also not in dispute, which would appear from letter of the University, contained in Annexure 6. A copy of the said letter was also forwarded to petitioner no.1 referring therein the name of petitioner no.1 as the husband of the deceased employee. However, the learned counsel for the petitioners submits that for expeditious disposal of the pending claims as highlighted in this writ application, the petitioners propose to file a fresh representation before the Vice-Chancellor of the respondent University. In case such a representation is filed stating the details of the unpaid claims distinctly as also enclosing the copy of the relevant documents, if any, in support of such claims, including the copy of the relevant instructions on the subject issued by the University/Government of Bihar, along with the certified copy of the 3 present order within a period of six weeks, the same shall be considered in the light of the documents annexed with the said representation in accordance with law expeditiously, preferably within a period of four months on receipt of such representation, so that the balance dues as claimed by the petitioners could be settled without further delay and the admitted dues could also be paid with statutory interest. However, if any claim/part of the claims is found not admissible, the same shall be communicated to the petitioner with the reasons thereof. The writ application stands disposed of with the above observations/directions. PNM (Shailesh Kumar Sinha, J.)