IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.20157 of 2011 Sri Prameshwar Yadav, Son of Late Shree Yadav, Resident of Village Malahchak P.S. Ghosi District – Jehanabad……Petitioner Versus 1. The Bihar State Electricity Board, Bihar, Patna Through: Its Chairman. 2. The General Manager cum Chief Engineer, Magadh Electricity Supply Area, Gaya. 3. The Superintending Engineer, Electricity Supply Circle, Gaya (Rural). 4. The Executive Engineer, Electricity Supply Division, Gaya (Rural). ……. Respondents ---------------------------------- 3 21.11.2011 Today again, on call, none appeared on behalf of respondents/Bihar State Electricity Board. Heard Sri Ramesh Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner. The petitioner, who retired on 31.08.2009 as ‘Skilled Khalasi’ from the office of Respondent No. 4 / Executive Engineer, Electricity Supply Division, Gaya (Rural), has prayed for directing the respondents to clear the following dues:- (i) Gratuity: Rs. 3,05,717/- (ii) C.D.A. Arrear: Rs. 7,013/- (iii) Pension Arrear: Rs. 26,393/- (iv) Pay Revision Arrear: Rs. Not Known On perusal of the writ petition it appears that the petitioner has not brought on record any representation filed before the authority concerned. The court is of the opinion that before making a prayer for issuance of a writ of ‘Mandamus’ demand of justice before competent authority is required. In absence of demand of justice no specific relief in the writ petition can be granted. Accordingly, the writ petition can be disposed of granting liberty to the petitioner to 2 demand justice by way of filing a detailed representation before respondent no. 2 /General Manager-cum-Chief Engineer, Magadh Electricity Supply Area, Gaya, regarding the claim made in the present writ petition. If such representation is filed within six weeks from today, the respondent no. 2 is required to examine the same and pass appropriate order in accordance with law within a period of two months from the date of filing of such representation. If the respondent no. 2 considers the claim of the petitioner as genuine, he is required to clear all the claimed amount within aforesaid time. Even in case of refusal, the respondent no. 2 is required to pass a speaking order and communicate the same to the petitioner. With above observation and direction the writ petition stands disposed of. Praful ( Rakesh Kumar, J.)