IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.11298 of 2005 SUDHESHWAR PRASAD SINGH Versus THE BIHAR STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD ----------- For the B.S.E.B. : Mr. Subhash Kishore Verma, Advocate Mr. Vinay Kirti Singh, Advocate For the Petitioner : Mr. Kamla Lal Shrivastava, Adv. ----------- 3 23.07.2008 Petitioner is claiming a sum of Rs. 1,26,731.35 paise under the heading of overtime. It is apparent from annexure – 2 dated 13.1.2005, which is his representation that he has already been paid Rs. 54,149.00. Claiming overtime dues is one thing and entitlement is yet another issue, but then if the petitioner has made a grievance with regard to non-payment which has been addressed to the Electrical Executive Engineer, Transmission Division, Dehri-On-Sone, Respondent no. 5, then the respondent no.5 ought to communicate to him the final position if he is not entitled to the balance payment. The writ application is disposed of with a direction upon respondent no.5 that he shall communicate to the petitioner, the reason based on which the balance of the claim cannot be paid. If it is the other way around that the petitioner’s claim is in order then he has a duty to take steps for payment also. Let a final decision in this regard 2 be taken by respondent no.5 within a period of three months from the date of communication or production of the copy of this order. Rajeev/ (Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J.)