Research › Search › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

2000 DIGILAW 519 (PAT)

Hari Shanker Prasad v. State Of Bihar

2000-04-03

RADHA MOHAN PRASAD

body2000
Judgment 1. The dispute in this writ petition is with respect to the portion of quarter in which petitioner continued to remain in occupation even after his retirement. According to the case of the petitioner he was in occupation of half portion of quarter as is evident from the order dated 2.9.1996 issued by the Principal, Navin Government Polytechnic, Patna contained in Annexure-7/B whereas in the order dated 5.8.98 issued by the Director, Science and Technology, contained in Annexure-7/A it is mentioned that out of total area of 1886.72 sq. ft. the petitioner is in occupation of one thousand and five hundred sq. ft. and in the counter affidavit the stand of the Respondents is that the petitioner was found in occupation of 1886.72 sq. ft. area of the quarter. 2. Thus, there appears to be some discrepancy with respect to the area occupied in the quarter by the petitioner which can effectively be resolved only by the competent authority, namely, the Director, Science and Technology (Respondent no. 3). Accordingly, as prayed the petitioner is given liberty to move Respondent no. 3 for redressai of his aforementioned grievance. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in view of the fact that the petitioner retired on 31.7.1992 and his post-retiral dues have been paid by issuing authority slip in the year 1997 this Court should consider to award interest. 4. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the present case, the petitioner in this regard is also given liberty to move the Director, Science and Technology pursuant to the Government decision for payment of interest on delayed payment of the legitimate dues. 5. Petitioner will be at liberty to raise any other grievance also before the Director (Respondent no. 3) and if the aforementioned grievances are raised by the petitioner within four weeks the same shall be considered and disposed of by reasoned order by Respondent no. 3 within four weeks of its receipt. The sanction order in respect of any further amount found payable must also be issued within the aforesaid time. The petitioner, if feels aggrieved by the order of the Director, will be at liberty to challenge its validity before the appropriate forum. 6. The writ application is accordingly disposed of.