Hon'ble Virendra Singh,J.:- Heard Sri P.N. Saxena, Senior Advocate Assisted by Sri Ram Autar Verma, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Devi Shankar Shukla, learned counsel for respondent No.5, Sri J.P. Rai, learned counsel for respondent No 6. Sri Deep Kumar has filed counter affidavit on behalf of respondent No.8. Counter affidavit and rejoinder affidavits have been exchanged and with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, this writ petition is being disposed of. By this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs. a) To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the Respondent No.1 to get the proceeds of Kisan Vikas Patras of a sum of Rs. 90,000/-(Maturity value Rs. 1,80,000/-) and deposit the proceeds of Kisan Vikas Patras along with interest in GPF Account No. 5104/46 of the petitioner. b) To issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the Respondent to take suitable action against the respondent No.6, who is malafidely, illegally and arbitrarily withheld the proceeds of the Contributory Provident Fund of the petitioner. c) to issue such other and further writ, order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper under the circumstances of the case; so that justice be done. d) to award cost of the writ petition throughout to the petitioner as against the respondents. The petitioner's case in the writ petition is that the petitioner was working as a Reader, Department of Geography, D.N. College, District Farrukhabad. The petitioner was a member of Contributory Provident Fund Scheme and as per the Rules prevailing at the time of appointment as lecturer and joining his duties on 28.8.1968, his Contributory Provident Fund Account No.6351 stand with the Farrukhabad District Co-operative Bank Ltd Fatehgarh Branch and was jointly operated with the Principal. As per practices, teachers were investing and reinvesting their Provident Fund into National Saving certificate/Kisan Vikas Patras. The petitioner's case in the writ petition is that he invested and deposited in Kishan Vikas Patra of Rs. 17,000/- on 11.12.1990, Rs. 25,000/- 0n 13.8.1993, Rs. 25,000/- 0n 3. 11. 1993 and Rs. 40,000/- on 5.8.1994. The Government Order dated 25.1.1996 was issued giving option to the teachers to change for General Provident Fund and Pension. The petitioner's case in the writ petition is that he invested and deposited in Kishan Vikas Patra of Rs. 17,000/- on 11.12.1990, Rs. 25,000/- 0n 13.8.1993, Rs. 25,000/- 0n 3. 11. 1993 and Rs. 40,000/- on 5.8.1994. The Government Order dated 25.1.1996 was issued giving option to the teachers to change for General Provident Fund and Pension. The petitioner's case is that he opted the Provident Fund Scheme and amount in the contributing Provident Fund account was deposited in the Provident Fund Scheme. However, the amount of Rs.90,000/- which was deposited in Kisan Vikas Patras was neither encashed nor was deposited. The Committee of Management issued letter dated 20.8.1997 to the respondent No.6, Dr. Bhola Singh, Principal, D.N. College, Fatehgarh, District Farrrukhabad asking for detail of those teachers whose Investments are still lying on Kisan Vikas Patras. Thereafter the respondent No.6 are reply enclosing the statements of investments certificates of Contributory Provident Fund showing all the details of investments done by the petitioner. The petitioner's case is that the Principal replied to the Committee of Management that records which are with the Committee of Management be returned back to the Principal. On a complaint submitted by the petitioner an enquiry was got conducted by the respondent No.1, Director of Education (Higher) through the District Inspector of Schools, Farrukhabad with regard to Kisan Vikas Patras of the petitioner and report was submitted by the District Inspector of Schools on 5.10.2004 recommending that the respondent No. 6, Principal of D.N. College, Fatehgarh, District Farrukhabad be directed to get duplicate of the Kisan Vikas Patras prepared and the same be got deposited in the account of Provident Fund of the petitioner. In pursuance of the said report, no steps were taken, hence the petitioner has approached this Court. The respondent No.3, Regional Higher Education Officer, Gorakhpur, on 3.3.2005 has wrote a letter to the Principal to get Kisan Vikas Patras in the name of the petitioner encashed and deposited in his account. Counter affidavit has been filed by respondent No.6 who has taken stand that Kisan Vikas Patras to the tune of Rs. 90,000/- were prepared in the joint name of the petitioner and respondent No.6. However, the stand has sought to be taken that the said Kisan Vikas Patras are with the President of the Committee of Management of the college. Counter affidavit has been filed by respondent No.6 who has taken stand that Kisan Vikas Patras to the tune of Rs. 90,000/- were prepared in the joint name of the petitioner and respondent No.6. However, the stand has sought to be taken that the said Kisan Vikas Patras are with the President of the Committee of Management of the college. A letter dated 8.10.1991 written by respondent No.6 to the President of Committee of Management of the College has been referred to Respondent No.8 has also filed counter affidavit stating that the Kisan Vikas Patras were in the custody of the principal Dr. Bhola Singh and direction was issued by the Committee of Management to get the same encashed. The order dated 23rd of September, 2000 passed on the application of the petitioner has been annexed as annexure CA-1. Sri Devi Shankar Shukla, learned counsel for respondent No.5 submits that the respondent No.5, Post Master, Head Post Officer, Fatehgarh, District Farrukhabad has been unnecessarily impleaded in the writ petition as no relief has been claimed against the aforesaid respondent No.5. He further submits that respondent No.5 came to know about the aforesaid facts only when certain claim of Kisan Vikas Patras has been made. He submits that no requisition for encashment has been received by respondent No.5 till filing of the petition. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. From the material brought on record, it is clear that there is no dispute that the amount of Rs.90,000/- as noted above, which was invested in Kisan Vikas Patras was the amount lying in the Provident Fund Account of the petitioner which was invested in the joint name of respondent No.6 and the petitioner. As reported by District Inspector of Schools on 4.10. 2004, the petitioner was entitled for payment of said amount. Contrary stand is being taken by respondent Nos. 6 and 8 with regard to actual custody of the Kisan Vikas Patras. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he has been informed that unless there is a First Information Report lodged with regard to Kisan Vikas Patra, the respondent No.5 can not proceed further as per Post Office Rules. Contrary stand is being taken by respondent Nos. 6 and 8 with regard to actual custody of the Kisan Vikas Patras. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he has been informed that unless there is a First Information Report lodged with regard to Kisan Vikas Patra, the respondent No.5 can not proceed further as per Post Office Rules. Considering the fact that the entitlement of the petitioner has not been disputed, we are of the view that the petitioner as well as respondent No.6 may take appropriate steps for encashment of Kisan Vikas Patras including lodging the First Information Report in case first the Kisan Vikas Patras are not available. Both the petitioner and respondent No.6 may appear before respondent No.5 for completing the necessary formalities for casement of Kisan Vikas Patras. The respondent No.5, after receiving such requisition may proceed in accordance with Rules which are applicable with regard to encashment of Kisan Vikas Patras. We clarify that it shall be necessary for the respondent No.6 to take appropriate steps only when the Kisan Vikas Patras in the name of respondent No.6, who was the Principal of the college at the time when the Kisan Vikas Patras was prepared, however, it is in the name of Principal of the college the person who is holding the post of Principal may take appropriate steps. The writ petition is disposed of with the aforesaid observations.