IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.5551 of 2010 DHRUB DAYAL SINGH, S/O LATE NAGESHWAR SINGH, R/O VILL.- MANGARA, P.O.BHAKURA, P.S.KARAKAT, (GORARI), DISTT-ROHTAS (SASARAM). ---Petitioner Versus 1. THE BIHAR STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, VIDYUT BHAWAN, BAILEY ROAD, PATNA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY. 2. THE CHAIRMAN, BIHAR STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, VIDYUT BHAWAN, BAILEY ROAD, PATNA. 3. THE SECRETARY, BIHAR STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, VIDYUT BHAWAN, BAILEY ROAD, PATNA. 4. THE GENERAL MANAGER-CUM-CHIEF ENGINEER, CENTRAL BIHAR AREA ELECTRICITY BOARD, PATNA. 5. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF ACCOUNTS, CENTRAL BIHAR AREA ELECTRICITY BOARD, PATNA. 6. THE ELECTRICAL EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, ELECTRIC SUPPLY DIVISION, ARRAH, BHOJPUR. ---Respondents ----------- 4. 4.8.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. The grievance of the petitioner is with regard to the deduction of Rs.15,740/- from his gratuity as per the order vide Memo No.7549 dated 13th December, 2007, as contained in Annexure 1, on account of non- passing of Hindi Noting and Drafting Examination (hereinafter referred to as “the Examination”). Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner had passed the Examination on 2nd of April, 1998 as stated in paragraph 3 of the supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of the petitioner, a copy of which has been served on the learned Counsel for the Board on 11th of May, 2010. Notwithstanding the above, it is submitted that in any view of the matter, after retirement, no recovery ought to have been made from 2 the gratuity of the petitioner as the excess payment has been made to him in which he had no role to play nor he had committed any fraud or misrepresentation. From the averments made in the writ application, it is not clear whether the petitioner has approached the Department against the aforesaid order of recovery or there is any statement to the effect that no recovery could be made since the petitioner had already passed the Examination. In this view of the matter, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner proposes to file a representation before the Electrical Executive Engineer, Electric Supply Division, Arrah, Bhojpur (respondent no.6), with a copy to the General Manager-Cum-Chief Engineer, Central Bihar Area Electricity Board, Patna (respondent no.4). In case such a representation is filed stating the details of his grievance as also enclosing the copy of the relevant documents, if any, in support of such claims along with the certified copy of the present order within a period of four weeks, the grievances of the petitioner as raised in his representation be considered in accordance with law expeditiously, preferably within a period of four months on receipt of such representation. Upon consideration, if it is found that the petitioner had already passed the 3 Examination as well as there is no fraud or misrepresentation on the part of the petitioner in receiving the excess payment, the aforesaid recovered amount of Rs.15,740/- be refunded back to him within a period of two months thereafter. The writ application stands disposed of with the above observations/directions. PNM (Shailesh Kumar Sinha, J.)