IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.13884 of 2006 BACHOO PRASAD SINGH, Son of Late Devi Dayal Singh, Resident of Village – Koyal Bhupat, Police Station – Mehandia, District – Jahanabad. --------- Petitioner Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR through its Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna. 2. The Executive Engineer, Western Koshi Canal, Division No. 1, Madhubani, Police Station- Rahika, District – Madhubani. 3. The Sub-Divisional Officer, Western Koshi Canal, Sub-Division No. 1, Sakri Camp Kothia, District -Madhubani. 4. The District Magistrate, Jahanabad, in the District of Jahanabad. 5. The Treasury Officer, Jahanabad in the District of Jahanabad. 6. The Accountant General, Government of Bihar, Patna. --------- Respondents ----------- 2 5/5/2011 Heard Sri Ranjan Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Ajay Kumar, learned A.C. to A.A.G. No. 8, who appears on behalf of respondent nos. 1 to 5 and Sri Raj Nandan Prasad, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent no. 6/Accountant General, Bihar. The present writ petition was filed with a prayer to direct the respondents to pay him revised pension and benefit under the Assured Career Progression Scheme with statutory interest with effect from his date of retirement i.e. 31.08.2000 and also for consequential relief. From the pleading it appears that the petitioner after retirement had approached this court vide C.W.J.C. No. 647 of 2001 for retiral dues which was disposed of on 19.03.2004. It was notice by this court that during the pendency of the writ petition the petitioner was paid practically all his retiral and other dues. At that very time he had only raised a grievance that he had not been 2 allowed benefits of three increments including increments to Junior & Senior Selection Grades. While disposing of the writ petition the court granted liberty to file representation with certain directions. Thereafter, on the plea of non-compliance of the order a contempt petition vide M.J.C. No. 63 of 2005 was filed which too was disposed of on 10.11.2005. In the contempt proceeding a plea was taken that he was not allowed benefit under the Assured Career Progression Scheme. This court while hearing M.J.C. No. 63 of 2005 observed that said claim was not subject matter in the writ petition, and as such, contempt petition was disposed of with certain observations. Subsequently, the present writ petition was filed. During the pendency of the writ petition a counter affidavit was filed on behalf of respondent nos. 1 to 3 on 16th March, 2007 and subsequently, a detailed counter affidavit was also filed on behalf of respondent no. 6/Accountant General, Bihar, wherein, a categorical statement has been made that Accountant General had already issued authorisation for revised pension and also petitioner has been granted relief under the A.C.P scheme. The petitioner has also filed reply to the counter affidavit and in reply a plea has been taken that aforesaid relief was granted at a belated stage, and as such, the petitioner is entitled to get statutory interest on delayed payment. From the pleading it is difficult to decide as to how delay had occurred and who was responsible for delay and as to whether actually delay had occurred intentionally or not. Such 3 disputed facts cannot be examined by this court under its writ jurisdiction. Accordingly, the court is of the opinion that no such relief can be granted. In view of the fact that all other reliefs have been granted, there is no need to further keep the matter pending. The writ petition stands disposed of. Praful (Rakesh Kumar, J.)