IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.2198 of 2008 RAM SINGHASAN PRASAD Versus THE PATNA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION & ORS. with CWJC No.2900 of 2008 HEMLAL Versus THE COMMISSIONER CUM CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER,PMC & ORS. with CWJC No.5201 of 2008 LALAN SINGH Versus PATNA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION & ORS. with CWJC No.7517 of 2008 KAMTA PRASAD SINGH Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS with CWJC No.8933 of 2008 BINDESHWAR RAM Versus THE PATNA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION with CWJC No.9583 of 2008 MOSTT.KALAWATI @ KALWATIA Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS. with CWJC No.10383 of 2008 SRI KISHUN RAI Versus THE MUNICIPAL COMMISSIONER, PMC & ORS. with CWJC No.11373 of 2008 RASIDA KHATOON Versus THE NAGAR COMMISSIONER OFFICER, PMC & ORS. with CWJC No.11440 of 2008 MINA DEVI Versus THE NAGAR COMMISSIONER OFFICER,PMC & ORS. with CWJC No.11536 of 2008 JANAK RAI Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS. with CWJC No.11593 of 2008 LAGNI DEVI Versus THE NAGAR COMMISSIONER OFFICER,PMC & ORS. with CWJC No.11596 of 2008 SHAKUNTLA DEVI Versus THE NAGAR COMMISSIONER OFFICER, PMC & ORS. with 2 CWJC No.11599 of 2008 TARWA Versus THE NAGAR COMMISSIONER OFFICER,PMC & ORS. with CWJC No.11756 of 2008 KALLU Versus PATNA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION & ORS. with CWJC No.11770 of 2008 PARBATIA Versus THE NAGAR COMMISSIONER OFFICER,PMC & ORS. with CWJC No.11872 of 2008 MANOJ RAM Versus THE NAGAR COMMISSIONER OFFICER,PMC & ORS. with CWJC No.11913 of 2008 ARJUN Versus THE NAGAR COMMISSIONER OFFICER, PMC & ORS. with CWJC No.12028 of 2008 MUNNI DEVI Versus THE NAGAR COMMISSIONER OFFICER,PMC & ORS. with CWJC No.12938 of 2008 SHEETA DEVI Versus THE PATNA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION & ORS. with CWJC No.12941 of 2008 SHAIL DEVI Versus THE PATNA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION & ORS. with CWJC No.13006 of 2008 SUNNY KUMAR Versus THE PATNA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION & ORS. with CWJC No.13074 of 2008 RAJ KUMAR Versus THE PATNA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION & ORS. with CWJC No.13811 of 2008 BASANTI DEVI Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS. with CWJC No.13971 of 2008 BINOD RAM Versus THE PATNA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION & ORS. with 3 CWJC No.14347 of 2008 BAIJNATH PRASAD SINGH Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS. ----------- 2. 22.4.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel appearing for the respondent-Corporation. Since all these writ applications relate to the payment of the retiral dues and some other dues, with consent of the parties, they all have been heard and are being disposed of by this common order. The grievances of the petitioners in these writ applications are with regard to the payment of retiral dues as also certain other dues, which, according to the petitioners, have not been finally settled by the respondent-Corporation till date despite requests causing financial hardship to them. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent-Corporation submit that in some of the cases, the claims of the petitioners have been settled and paid. However, it will be open for the concerned petitioners to represent their unpaid claims before the Municipal Commissioner of the respondent-Corporation, which shall be considered as per law without delay. In the above circumstances, learned counsel for the petitioners submit that for expeditious disposal of their pending claims, the concerned petitioners propose to file their separate representation before the Municipal Commissioner of the respondent- Corporation stating distinctly all their unpaid claims as also enclosing 4 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 six weeks from today. In case such separate representations are filed, the grievances of the petitioners raised in their respective representations shall be considered in accordance with law expeditiously, preferably within a period of four months on receipt of such representations, so that the grievances raised in their respective representations may be settled at the earliest and the admitted dues, if any, may also be paid with interest permissible under the rules. Upon consideration, however, if any of the claims or part of the claims raised by the petitioners in their representations is found not admissible under the rules, the same shall be informed to the concerned petitioners with the reasons thereof. Such communication shall be made to the petitioners by post under registered cover. With respect to C.W.J.C. No.14347 of 2008, the widow of the petitioner shall be entitled to make the representation. All the above writ applications stand disposed of with the above observations/directions. PNM (Shailesh Kumar Sinha, J.)