IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.11112 of 2005 RAMYASH RAI Versus BIHAR STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD & ORS. ----------- 02/ 02.04.2010 Heard Mr. Mani Madhukar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Vijay Kumar Verma, junior counsel to Mr. Vinay Kirti Singh representing the Electricity Board. The learned counsel for the petitioner admits to payment of almost the entire retiral claims of the petitioner except a part of the G.P.F. amount which has remained pending by the Electricity Board. Learned counsel in support of his submission refers to an order dated 2.7.2004 authorizing the payment of provident fund to the tune of Rs. 12,13,195/-. However, from the said admissible amount, an amount of Rs. 1,10,856/- has been withheld by the respondent Board subject to certain decisions. The balance amount of Rs. 11,02,337/- was paid to the petitioner. Learned counsel thus submits that without any reason the said amount remains to be withheld by the respondent Board and that he is not only entitled for the principal amount but also for the interest arising for the delay caused in disbursement of the said amount. He submits that the petitioner superannuated as an Assistant Electrical Engineer on 3.6.2004 and the said amount has remained withheld by the Board for almost six years. 2 A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondent Board but no reasons have been assigned as to the withheld amount. A detail of payment has been set out in the counter affidavit at paragraph-6. It also does not deal with the said issue. In that view of the matter, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent no. 4, the Deputy Director (Accounts), Bihar State Electricity Board, Patna to examine the claim of the petitioner and if found admissible, make payment of the balance G.P.F. amount of the petitioner amounting to Rs. 1,10,856/- together with up to date interest as applicable on the said amount under the statutory orders of the Board calculated from the date of superannuation of the petitioner until the date the payments are made. In case the amount is not found admissible to the petitioner the same should be disposed of by a reasoned order. In either situation, the issue has to be settled within three months of receipt/production of a copy of this order. The writ petition is disposed of with the direction aforesaid. S.Sb/- (Jyoti Saran, J.)