IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.15860 of 2004 DEEN DAYAL RAY, SON OF LATE RAM SINGHASAN RAY, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE – JAHANGIRPUR AT PRESENT NAYATOLA BHARPURA, P.O. +P.S. – SONEPUR, DISTRICT – SARAN Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, SARAN 3. DISTRICT EDUCATION OFFICER, SARAN 4. DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF EDUCATION, SARAN 5. ACCOUNTANT GENERAL, BIHAR PATNA 6. TREASURY OFFICER, SARAN (CHAPRA) 7. DISTRICT PROVIDENT FUND OFFICER, SARAN (CHAPRA) ----------- 10. 14.05.2009 A reply to the counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the petitioner, copy of which has been served to the counsel for the respondent. Heard. After some arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner proposes to file a representation before the respondent no. 4 highlighting the grievances with regard to quantum of difference of salary and also the payment of the amount outstanding in the suspense account. The other grievance of the petitioner is that although the interest over the provident fund dues has been paid, however interest has not been correctly paid. In the above circumstances, petitioner proposes - 2 - to file representation before the respondent no. 4 as also the respondent no. 7. In case such separate representation is filed alongwith the relevant documents in support of the claim, the above respondents shall consider the grievance of the petitioner as raised in his representation in accordance with law expeditiously, preferably within a period of four months on receipt of such representation. The writ application is disposed of with the above observations/directions. Jagdish/- (Shailesh Kumar Sinha,J)