IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.1541 of 2010 LOKNATH PRASAD S/O LATE CHHATRU MAHTO R/O CHHOTI RAHARI, PO & P.S- SOHSARAI, DISTT- NALANDA Versus 1. THE COMMISSIONER,EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND, BIHAR, PATNA 2. THE ASSTT. PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER (PENSION) BIHAR, B- BLOCK, ROAD, NO.-6, PATNA 3. SHRI SHIV PRASAD, null DIRECTOR, BIHARSHARIF COLD STORAGE LTD. SINGARHAT, PO- SOHSARAI, DISTT- NALANDA ----------- 2 01.02.2010 Heard learned counsels for the petitioner and the State. In this writ application the petitioner as prayed for quashing of the letter no. BR-PA-4/1576/10D/06/1241 dated 8th of October, 2009 (Annexure-8) issued by the respondent no.2 communicating the petitioner that he is not entitled to pension under 1995 scheme as he was not the beneficiary of the earlier scheme of 1971. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in his representation petitioner has categorically stated to the effect that the monthly contributions toward the pension scheme 1971 was being deducted and deposited, and as such, it is not correct to say that the petitioner was not covered under the 1971 scheme. It is further submitted that the authorities while considering the representation of the petitioner did not consider the necessary information furnished therein. Mr. R.S. Pradhan, learned Senior Counsel, appearing for the respondent nos. 1 & 2 submits that in view of the above submission of the petitioner, the claims of the petitioner shall be verified without delay as per law. In the above circumstances, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that for expeditious disposal of his claims, petitioner proposes to file a representation before the respondent no.2. In such view of the matter, in case such representation giving specific claims is filed by the petitioner within a period of six weeks along with the certified copy of the present order as also the copy of the relevant documents in support of the claim, the above respondent shall consider each of the claims raised by the petitioner in his representation in accordance with law expeditiously, preferably within a period of four months on receipt of such representation if necessary after giving notice to the respondent no.3 so that the grievances of the petitioner could be settled without delay and admitted dues along with statutory interest could also be paid to the petitioner. In view of the above, the order as contained in Annexure-8 stands quashed and the matter is remitted back to the respondent no. 2 for passing necessary order as indicated above. The writ application is, accordingly, disposed of with the above observations/directions. Manish/- (Shailesh Kumar Sinha,J.)