IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.10104 of 2008 Sheo Shankar Prasad, Son of Late Mathura Prasad, resident of Village- Dhansingra, P.O. Dhansinghra, Via Khizarsarai, P.S. Khizarsarai, District-Gaya -------------------------- Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Bihar through the Collector, Jehanabad, District- Jehanabad 2. The Director, Provident Fund, Provident Fund Directorate, Pant Bhawan, Bailey Road,Patna 3. The Accountant General,Bihar, Birchand Patel Path,Patna 4. The District Provident Fund Officer, Jehanabad, District-Jehanabad 5. The Block Development Officer, Kako, District-Jehanabad ----------------------------------- Respondents. ---------------------------------- 02 24-10-2011 Heard Sri Ghanshyam Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Ashok Kumar Mishra, learned A.C. to Standing Counsel no.7, who appears on behalf of the Respondent/State. The present writ petition was filed in the year 2008 with a prayer to direct the Respondent to revise pension and other retiral dues including payment of G.P.F. amount. The petitioner had retired long back in the year 2000 as Panchayat Sewak from the office of Respondent no.5/ Block Development Officer, Kako, Jehanabad. In this case a counter affidavit was filed in the year 2009 on behalf of Respondent nos.1 and 5. It was submitted by learned counsel for the State that all other retiral dues of the petitioner have already been paid. However, from the counter affidavit itself, it is evident that on the date of filing of the counter affidavit, some of the amount under the head of G.P.F. was outstanding, for which necessary direction was issued to the District Provident Fund Officer, Jehanabad in the year 2009 itself. Learned counsel for the 2 petitioner submits that till date entire amount of G.P.F. has not been paid to the petitioner. Learned counsel for the State is not in a position to inform the Court as to whether payment has been made or not. Till date no counter affidavit has been filed by Respondent no.4/ District Provident Fund Officer, Jehanabad . In view of the fact that no affidavit has been filed on behalf of Respondent no.4 as well as statement made by learned counsel for the petitioner that still some amount under the head of G.P.F. is outstanding, the Court is of the opinion that the writ petition can be disposed of directing the Respondent no.4/ District Provident Fund Officer, Jehanabad to pay all the amount of G.P.F. to the petitioner along with admissible statutory interest within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order, if the same is not paid till date. So far as clearance of other retiral dues is concerned, it has been admitted by learned counsel for the parties that same has already been cleared. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of. NKS/- ( Rakesh Kumar, J.)