IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.2364 of 2007 RAMASHISH SINGH, son of Late Ram Bilash Singh, aged about 61 years, resident of Village Karsara,P.O. Karsara, P.S. Rafiganj, District Aurangabad. --Petitioner Versus 1. Bihar State Electricity Board, through its Secretary, Vidyut Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna. 2. The Chairman, Bihar State Electricity Board, Patna. 3. General Manager-cum-Chief Engineer, Electric Supply Area, Gaya. 4. Electrical Superintending Engineer, Electric Supply Circle, Gaya. 5. Electrical Executive Engineer,Electric Supply Division, Aurangabad. ---Respondents ----------- 4. 8.7.2009 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the respondent-Board. The petitioner is aggrieved by Office Order No.59 dated 22nd of February, 2006, communicated to him as per Memo No.316 dated 22nd of February, 2006, as contained in Annexure 9, whereby it was found that the salary allowed to the petitioner with effect from 2.7.1984 till the date of his retirement was not correct and as such the excess amount was directed to be recovered from the retiral dues of the petitioner. The petitioner on being aggrieved by the aforesaid order represented vide his representation dated 5th of March, 2006, as contained in Annexure 10, stating to the effect that the aforesaid office order, contained in Annexure 9, is contrary to the Office Order no.4361 dated 30th of October, 1980 as well as letter no.4316 dated 14th of October, 1985. The learned counsel submits that the aforesaid order, as contained in Annexure 9, is also not correct in 2 view of the Standing Order No.561 /EB dated 1.7.1977, as contained in Annexure A to the counter affidavit filed by the Board. The learned counsel appearing for the Board, on the other hand, supports the office order, as contained in Annexure 9, however, submits that in case the representation of the petitioner dated 5.3.2006, as contained in Annexure 10, is not disposed of, the same shall be considered and disposed of within a period of four months. The learned counsel for the petitioner, however, submits that for expeditious disposal of his grievances, the petitioner proposes to file a fresh representation before the General Manager- cum-Chief Engineer, Electric Supply Area, Gaya (respondent no.3). In case such a detailed representation is filed within a period of four weeks along with the certified copy of the present order as also enclosing the copy of other relevant documents in support of his claim, the respondent no.3 shall consider the representation of the petitioner and take a final decision in accordance with law expeditiously, preferably within a period of four months on receipt of such representation so that the grievances of the petitioner could be redressed without further delay. The writ application stands disposed of with the above observations/directions. PNM (Shailesh Kumar Sinha, J.)