IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.11027 of 2010 RAM SWAROOP SINGH, Son of Late Lakshman Singh, aged about 80 years, resident of Village-Bajitpur, Post Office, Shabani, District-Patna ------------------ Petitioner Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR through the District Magistrate,Patna 2. The Treasury Officer,Patna 3. The Zonal Manager, State Bank of India, Main Branch, West Gandhi Maidan,Patna 4. The Chief Manager, Centralised Pension Processing Cell, State Bank of India, Exhibition Road,Patna 5. The Branch Manager, State Bank of India, Athmalgola Branch, District-Patna ------------------------- Respondents. ----------- 04 10-12-2010 Heard Sri Rajesh Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Rakesh Kumar Singh, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Respondent nos.3,4 and 5 and Smt. Shashi Priya, learned A.C. to G.A.4. In the present writ petition, the grievance of the petitioner is that he was getting pension amounting to Rs.3895/- regularly through the State Bank of India, Athmalgola Branch, Patna. However, without any rhyme and reason with effect from Month April, 2008 pension of the petitioner was reduced from Rs.3895/- to Rs.2963/-. After noticing the error, the petitioner represented before the Branch Manager as well as Treasury Officer, i.e. Respondent no.1. In the present writ petition, a counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of Respondent nos.3,4 and 5 ,i.e. the State Bank of India, in which it has been admitted that the pension was incorrectly reduced . However, the reduction was due to the reason, which was 2 beyond the control of the Bank. It has been stated that the pension of the petitioner was reduced due to erroneous migration to Data without dearness pension by the Branch, which was subsequently corrected and arrears was paid with dearness pension with effect from March, 2008 to June, 2010. In paragraph-6, it was submitted by Sri Rakesh Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the Bank that instead of “June, 2010” the word “January, 2010” has been wrongly typed. The difference of amount has already been paid to the petitioner by the Bank. The total amount was Rs.78, 958/-. In view of the stand taken by the Bank, Sri Rajesh Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Bank has paid only those amounts to the petitioner, which were incorrectly reduced by the Bank. According to the petitioner, he is entitled to get interest at the market rate on the incorrectly deducted amount,i.e. 78,958. The stand of the petitioner has been vehemently opposed by Sri Rakesh Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the Respondent nos.3, 4 and 5. It was submitted that the pension was reduced not intentionally but due to error in Data, such deduction was made. The fact remains that the petitioner’s pension was incorrectly reduced by the Bank and the reduced amount was with the Bank from the month of April 2008 to the month of June 2010. The Court is of the opinion that the petitioner is entitled to get interest on the amount, which was incorrectly reduced by the Bank in similar manner as the Bank is charging from the customer. Accordingly, the writ petition is being disposed of with a 3 direction to the Bank to calculate the interest on the incorrectly deducted amount and make payment to the petitioner within a period of one month from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. With above observation and direction, the petition stands disposed of . NKS/- ( Rakesh Kumar, J.)