ORDER By the Court.-learned counsel for the parties. 2. In the first writ application. W.P. (S) No. 5458 of 2008 the petitioner, retired employee of the respondent-Board had come before this Court for directing the respondents to pay the arrear of pension and 10% gratuity amount to which he was entitled along with statutory as well as penal interest. In the second writ application, W.P.S. No. 5989 of 2009 the petitioner had come seeking quashing of an office order No. 18 dated 19.2.2009 issued by the office of Electrical Superintending Engineer, Electric Supply Circle, Deoghar by which the salary of the petitioner was re-fixed as on 15.1.1980 at Rs. 624/- instead of Rs. 678/- and the excess payment made on that account earlier was sought, to be recovered for the period from 15.1.1980 to 31.12.2008 i.e. the date of retirement. He had also sought for quashing of the letter-dated 9.9.2009 by which he was asked to show-cause as to why sumo of Rs. 1.05.802/- be not recovered from the retiral, benefits as excess payment received by him and lastly he has also prayed for a direction to finalize the pensions and gratuity on the last pay scale received at the time of his retirement. 3. In both. the writ application the issues appear to be common as the double pay fixation benefit which was granted to the employees including the present petitioners were subsequently been sought to be recovered by way of impugned order. 4. The matter was adjourned on a number of dates and finally counter-affidavit has been filed in each of the case in the month of June, 2012 and February, 2013, respectively. Counsel for the petitioner submitted that similar benefits were earlier granted to similarly placed employees from whom also the excess amount paid was sought to be recovered. However, the same has been corrected by the respondent-Board itself as per the statement made in para 7 of the writ petition W.P.S. No. 5989 of 2009. The respondents have taken stand by relying upon the decision contained in Annexure-A dated 6.7.2012 that the benefits of double pay fixation as per the Board's Standing Order No. 125 dated 7.5.1983 can also be made applicable to the employees who got promotion between 7.5.1976 to 7.5.1983. It is the case of the petitioners that they fall within the same period when the double benefit was granted. It is the case of the petitioners that they fall within the same period when the double benefit was granted. In view of the aforesaid stand taken by the Board, both the writ applications can be disposed of directing the respondents to reconsider their decision in the matter of recovery from the post retirement benefits of the petitioners in view of their latest stand taken and brought on record by way of their counter-affidavit in W.P.S. No. 5989 of 2009 vide letter dated 6.7.2012. Counsel for the petitioner in W.P.S. No. 5458 of 2008, further, submitted that a motorcycle, advance of Rs. 10,000 has been recovered though he has never taken such advance. 5. Be that as it may, the petitioners are allowed to approach the respondents within 2 weeks for redressal of the aforesaid grievances relating to recovery of excess amount paid through double benefit as also the claim of adjustment of recovery of motorcycle advance by the petitioner in W.P.S. No. 5458 of 2008 with all supporting facts and documents before the competent authority i.e. the General Manager of the concerned electric supply area under whom the petitioners had last served before their retirement. In ease such representation is made before the competent authority, as aforesaid, he shall pass a reasoned and speaking order taking into, account the stand of the Board contained in letter dated 6.7.2012 within a period of 8 weeks, thereafter which shall also be communicated to the petitioners. Needless to say that if any consequential monetary benefits in post retiral dues arc found legally admissible, the same shall be paid within 8 weeks, thereafter with statutory interest, if any. 6. The writ petitions are disposed of in the aforesaid terms. Petitions disposed of.