IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.20400 of 2011 1. Ram Naresh Singh retired Accounts Assistant, son of late Rijhan Singh, resident of village and P.O. Khokasa P.S. Desari, Dist. Vaishali. ---Petitioner. Versus 1. The Bihar State Electricity Board, through its Secretary Vidyut Bhawan, bailey Road, Patna. 2. Financial Controller I Bihar State Electricity Board, Patna. 3. Secretary, Bihar State Electricity Board, Patna. 4. Joint Secretary, Bihar State Electricity Board, Patna. 5. Director (Terminal Benefit), Bihar State Electricity Board, Patna. 6. Director ( Audit), Bihar State Electricity Board, Patna. 7. The Electrical Executive Engineer (Establishment) M.T.P.S. Kanti, Muzaffarpur. ---Respondents. ---------------------------------- 02 22.11.2011 Heard learned counsels for the petitioner and respondent-Bihar State Electricity Board ( for short ‘Board’) . It is the case of the petitioner that on 06.02.1982 he was considered and promoted as Accounts Assistant and was granted 12% pay fixation benefit in terms of the relevant circular/standing order of the Board. Petitioner was getting the same until he superannuated from service on 30.09.2005 as Accounts Assistant. On 10.05.2007 the authorities of the Board re-examined his pay fixation matter and it was held that petitioner is not entitlted to doubly pay fixation. Said order was passed on 10.05.2007 as contained in office order no. 105 issued by the Electricial Executive Engineer, (Establishment), Muzaffarpur Thermal Power Station, Kanti. It appears that the aforesaid order was communicated to the petitioner in the year 2007, but the same was not challenged in this Court for all these years. It, thus, appears that there is inordinate delay in challenging the aforesaid order. Learned counsel submits that he had been pursuing his representation. Learned counsel also highlights that aforesaid issue has already been considered by this Court in CWJC No. 18367 of 2010 ( Nawal Kishore Prasad vs. The Bihar State Electricity Board & Ors.) (Annexure-4). If that be the case then this Court would permit the petitioner to file a representation before the concerned authority of the respondent ventilating his grievance and the concerned respondent shall consider and dispose of his representation in accordance with law as quickly as possible. Sym ( Kishore K. Mandal, J.)