IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.9968 of 2011 Awadhesh Kumar Sinha, Son of Late Braj Kishore Prasad, Resident of Mohalla Shivpuri (Near house of Laxman Yadav), Anishabad, P.S. Gardanibagh, District- Patna. ... ... Petitioner. Versus 1. The General Manager-Cum-Chief Engineer, Central Electric Supply Area, Bihar State Electricity Board, Serpentine Road, Patna. 2. The Secretary, Bihar State Electricity Board, Vidhut Bhawan, Patna. 3. The Member, Administration, Bihar State Electricity Board, Vidhut Bhawan, Patna. 4. The Director of Accounts (Funds), Bihar State Electricity Board, Vidhut Bhawan, Patna. 5. The Deputy Director of Accounts (Funds), Bihar State Electricity Board, Vidhut Bhawan, Patna. 6. The Electrical Superintendent Engineer, Electric Supply Circle, R- Block, Patna. 7. The Electrical Executive Engineer, Electric Supply Division, Phulwarisharif, Patna (Rural). ... ... Respondents. ----------- 2. 28.6.2011. Heard Shri Rajesh Kumar Verma, learned counsel for the petitioner and Smt. Sangita Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of all the respondents/Bihar State Electricity Board. The petitioner, who retired as Head Clerk from the office of Electric Supply Sub-Division, Phulwarisharif, Patna with effect from 30.11.2010, has prayed for directing the respondents to clear his retiral dues and also make payment of sanctioned amount of Leave Encashment, Group Insurance, G.P.F. and other retiral 2 dues. Learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn my attention to Annexures 1, 2 and 3, whereby G.P.F., Leave Encashment and Group Insurance amount was sanctioned in between December,2010 and January,2011. It was submitted that despite issuance of sanction order, till date payment has not been made nor petitioner is getting pension. It was further submitted that petitioner has filed representation before the authority concerned. However, no action has been taken by the Board. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Board submits that matter for settlement of retiral dues of the petitioner is under process. In view of the facts and circumstances, the court is of the opinion that respondents, particularly respondent no.4 can be directed to make payment of sanctioned amount G.P.F., Leave Encashment and Group Insurance within a period of one month from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. So far as other claims are concerned, the petitioner is 3 granted liberty to file a fresh representation before respondent nos.2 and 4 within a period of six weeks from today. After filing of the representation, both the respondents are required to examine the same and pass appropriate order in accordance with law within a period of two months from the date of filing of such representation. Respondents are further directed to take all steps to settle all the retiral dues of the petitioner within two months from the date of filing of such representation. Even in case of refusal, aforesaid respondents are directed to pass a speaking order within aforesaid time. It goes without saying that the petitioner shall be entitled to get admissible interest on delayed payment. With above observation and direction, the writ petition stands disposed of. N.H./ ( Rakesh Kumar,J.)