IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.934 of 2005 HARI NANDAN PD.SINHA, son late Rameshwar Sinha, resident of village- Chauhar, P.O. Anandpur, District-Arwal Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR through the Collector, Arwal, at P.O. & District-Arwal 2. The Block Development Officer, Arwal, at P.O. & District-Arwal 3. The District Provident Fund Officer, Jehanabad, at P.O. & District- Jehanabad 4. The Directorate of Provident Fund, Bihar, Pant Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna. ----------- 4 05.03.2010 Heard Mr. Subhash Prasad Singh learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State. The writ petition had been filed for payment of the G.P.F. amount of the petitioner who superannuated on 31.1.1990 from the post of Headclerk under the Block Development Officer, Arwal. In course of the proceeding two counter affidavits were filed one on behalf of the respondent No.2, Block Development Officer, Arwal and the other on behalf of the District Provident Fund Officer, Jehanabad, respondent No.3. The counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondent No.2, Block Development Officer, Arwal enclosed a statement of deductions of G.P.F. amount of the petitioner 2 right from the period 1955-56 until his date of retirement on 31.1.1990. The counter affidavit filed on behalf of the District Provident Fund Officer, Jehanabad, respondent No.3 nodoubt takes into consideration the fact of deductions towards provident fund for the period 1955-56 onwards but the payment disbursed is only in relation to the deductions made for the period 1975-76 until the date of retirement with up to date interest. Indisputably the G.P.F. amount of the petitioner for the period 1955-56 up to 31.3.1975 has not been taken into account nor been paid. It was in these circumstances that this Court by order dated 27.11.2009 directed the respondent authorities to verify the position and make payment of the balance G.P.F. claim of the petitioner for the period 1956 up to 31.3.1975 with up to date interest calculated up to date of its actual payment to the petitioner. Although the matter was adjourned for a period of six weeks but there is no counter affidavit in response to the issue pending before this Court. In the aforesaid circumstances, this Court is of the opinion that the no useful purpose would be served in 3 keeping the writ petition pending. In view of the admitted position noted above, this writ petition is disposed of with a liberty to the petitioner to file a representation enclosing the statement of its deductions made from the period 1955 -56 up to 31-3-1975, copy whereof is enclosed as Annexure-D of the counter affidavit of the Block Development Officer, Arwal, before the respondent No.3, the District Provident Fund Officer, Jehanabad and who shall examine and verify the same and if the said payments have not yet been paid to the petitioner then necessary payments with statutory interest calculated up to the date of its actual payment should be made over to the petitioner within three months from the date of filing of such representation. The writ petition is disposed of. Bibhash (Jyoti Saran, J. )