IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.8527 of 2007 JAY NARAYAN SINGH, son of Late Kamal Dev Narayan Singh, resident of village Mah Dali Chak, P.S. Naya Gaon, District Saran (Chhapra) … Petitioner Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. The Secretary of Public Works Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna 3. The Chief Engineer of Public Works Department, Patna 4. The Superintending Engineer, Public Works Department, Patna 5. The Executive Engineer, Public Works Department, Patna 6. The Accountant General, Patna … Respondents. ----------- 2. 4.5.2010 No one appears for the petitioner. In this writ application the prayer of the petitioner is for payment of certain retirement benefits as would be evident from the perusal of paragraph 1 which reads as follows: “ This is an application for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ for grant of death cum retirement benefits (i.e. gratuity, leave encashment, general provident fund, bonus) from 7.6.1980 to 28/980 and from 15.9.1985 to 16.10.1987 and from April, 1988 to November, 1988 i.e. 3 years 22 days and other admissible retirement benefits including arrears of salary, for which the petitioner is legally entitled with interest at 2 the rate of 12% per annum and/or for issuance of an appropriate writ, order or orders or direction for which the petitioner is found legally entitled.” The respondents have filed a counter affidavit wherein a stand has been taken that the payment of amount has already been made towards the death of father of the petitioner and in this context paragraphs 10 and 11 of the counter affidavit being relevant are quoted hereinbelow: “ It is respectfully submitted that the payment of different heeds has already been done on the basis of C.O. Sonepur report no. 78 dated 6.12.1989, after the death of petitioner, father, which description are as follows: S.No.description Amount date of payment 1. Exgretia Carrant 3000.00 9.12.1989 2. Group Insurance 50000.00 18.1.1990 3. Arrear pay w.e.f. 7.6.80 to 28.9.80, 15.9.80 to 16.10.97, 1.4.88 to 30.11.88 29732.00 7.11.1990 4. Bonus (a)year 86-87 680.20 19.4.1991 (b)year 87-88 726.00 19.4.1991 5. Provisional gratuity 5130.00 24.9.1993 6. G.P.F. 4028.00 17.7.1998 11. That it is also relevant to 3 mention here that after revision of record, unutilized leave provisional gratuity has been sanctioned vide T.D. order no. 208 cum Memo No. 3950 dated 20.11.07 and order no. 209 cum memo no. 3958 dated 20.11.2007 respectively and payment has already been made to the petitioner, which description are as follows: S.No.Description Amount Date of payment 1. Unutilized leave 10184.00 20.12.07 2. provisional 5006.00 20.12.07 Gratuity(rest) As with regard to family pension the respondents have taken a stand that in absence of proof of age regarding the dependent the issue of family pension has not been finally decided and to that extent certain plea of disentitlement of family pension has been explained in paragraphs 13 and 14 of the counter affidavit. Though a copy of the counter affidavit was served on the counsel for the petitioner way back on 8.2.2008 but there is no rejoinder to the same and coupled with the fact that when the counsel for the petitioner has also not appeared it has to be presumed that whatever grievance was 4 raised in this writ application and was legally sustainable, has been redressed. Specially when the learned Counsel for the Accountant General has also submitted that there has been no delay in authorizing sanction for payment of admissible retirement benefit. That being so, this application has literally become infructuous and is, accordingly, dismissed. (Mihir Kumar Jha,J.) Surendra/