IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.5735 of 2004 RAJENDRA PRASAD RAI, son of Late Ram Bilash Rai, resident of Mohalla Bag Dulhan, Madai Road, Hajipur, P.S. Town Hajipur, District Vaishali ... Petitioner Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR through Secretary cum Commissioner, Finance Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna 2. District Provident Fund Officer, Vaishali at Hajipur 3. District Magistrate, Vaishali at Hajipur 4. Director Finance (Provident Fund) Department, Bihar, Patna 5. Secretary cum Commissioner, Finance Department, Bihar, Patna ... Respondents ----------- 3. 22.11.2010 Heard Mr. Tej Bahadur Singh, learned Senior counsel for the petitioenr and the counsel for the State. The following prayer of the petitioner: “That the present writ petition is being filed for issuance of appropriate writ/writs for directing the respondents to pay interest at the rate of 12.5% against the contribution of petitioner towards amounts of general provident fund w.e.f. 17.3.1994 since when the petitioner who is the headmaster of Nationalized High School, has been declared as gazetted officer and has been contributing upto 15% and more of the basic pay scale against the GPF amount.” 2 being limited only for issuance of a direction for payment of interest at the rate of 12.5% against his contribution towards G.P.F. with effect from 17.3.1994, the date on which he was declared to be a gazetted Officer in capacity of Headmaster in the Nationalized High School, stands answered by the respondents in their counter affidavit which was filed on 17.12.2004, wherein it has been explained that the petitioner’s interest in the provident fund has been calculated at the rate of 12.5% from 1985-86 onwards. Normally that should have been end of the matter but Mr. Singh realizing that the writ application has remained pending from 7.5.2004 and now that the petitioner has also superannuated would submit that this Court should issue a direction for payment of further interest on the same basis till the petitioner remained in service i.e. up to 31.8.2009. As noted above, the writ application was confined to a cause of action for the period 17.3.1994 onwards and the same has absolutely been redressed. This 3 Court has also no reason to believe that the respondents who have already accepted their liability of payment of interest at the rate of 12.5% in the case of the petitioner would not honour the same for rest of the period of service of the petitioner if he is so entitled in law. That being so, this application in fact has become infructuous and is dismissed accordingly. (Mihir Kumar Jha,J.) Surendra/