IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.16362 of 2009 RAJAN KUMAR S/O LATE DINESH KUMAR SINGH R/O VILL./MOHALLA- EAST PATEL NAGAR, ROAD NO. 3, P.O. AND P.S.- SHASTRI NAGAR, DISTT.- PATNA Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, WATER RESOURCES DEPTT., BIHAR, PATNA 2. THE COMMISSIONER-CUM-SECRETARY WATER RESOURCES DEPTT., GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA 3. THE ADDITIONAL SECRETARY, WATER RESOURCES DEPTT., GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA 4. THE DEPUTY SECRETARY, WATER RESOURCES DEPTT., GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA 5. THE CHIEF ENGINEER, WATER RESOURCES DEPTT., DEHRI-ON-SONE, P.S.- DEHRI- ON-SONE, DISTT.- ROHTAS 6. THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, SONE CANAL MODERNIZATION CIRCLE, NUAON, KAIMUR 7. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, SONE CANAL MODERNIZATION DIVISION, DEHRI-ON- SONE, P.S.- DEHRI-ON-SONE, DISTT.- ROHTAS 8. THE DISTRICT PROVIDENT FUND OFFICER, KAIMUR AT BHABUA 9. THE DISTRICT PROVIDENT FUND OFFICER, ROHTAS AT SASARAM 4 19.03.2010 Heard learned counsels for the petitioner and the State. Despite availing time twice no counter affidavit has been filed till date. The grievance of the petitioner is that his father died in harness while working on the post of Assistant Engineer under the respondent no.6 on 16.11.1999, however the payment on account of the G.P.F. could not be made to the father of the petitioner and later the widow made her claims, however she also could not get the same, and as such, the petitioner has filed the present writ application. It is submitted that on perusal of the letter contained in memo no. 2495 dated 26.03.2003 written by the Deputy Secretary, Water Resources Development Department, Govt. of Bihar to the District Superintendent of Education, Rohtas at Sasaram sanctioning the payment of G.P.F. It is further submitted that same on being not paid, the mother of the petitioner started representing at various times, however the G.P.F. amount could not be settled and paid. Lastly, the learned counsel submits that as per the letter - 2 - contained in memo no. 398 dated 11.06.2008 written by the respondent no.6 to the District Provident Fund Officer, Sasaram sending all the necessary details and also requesting for payment of the G.P.F. amount in favour of the petitioner, the respondent no.6 requested to issue the necessary authorization and despite that neither the provident fund dues has been paid nor the petitioner has ever been informed of the same. Learned counsel appearing for the State submits that it requires to be verified as to in what circumstances the G.P.F. amount has not been paid to the petitioner despite the aforesaid letter as contained in Annexure-11. In the above circumstances, the District Provident Fund Officer, Rohtas at Sasaram is, hereby, directed to look into the claim of the petitioner for payment of the provident fund dues pursuant to the last letter written by the respondent no.6 as contained in Annexure-11 and make necessary payments to the petitioner with statutory interest as per the rule within a period of four months on receipt/production of the certified copy of the present order. However, in case upon consideration if it is found that the claim of the petitioner for payment of the provident fund dues is not admissible the same shall be informed to the petitioner with the reasons thereof within the aforesaid time. The writ application stands disposed of with the above observations/directions. Manish/- ( Shailesh Kumar Sinha,J.)