High CourtsSingle Bench

Bijay Krishna Prasad Singh vs State Of Bihar And Others

Patna High Court · Decided on 18 May 2020 · Citation: (2020) 05 PAT CK 0014

HON’BLE JUDGES
Anjani Kumar Sharan, J
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 5322 Of 2017
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

19 paragraphs · 331 words

Anjani Kumar Sharan, J

This case has been posted before me for hearing through video- conferencing, under the orders of Hon’ble the Chief Justice, in view of Nation

passing through lockdown as an aftermath of the outbreak of COVID-19 pandemic.

The petitioner, by way of filing this writ application, has approached this Court for the following reliefs:-

(I) For issuance of writ in nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding respondents to pay correct

pension payment (Rs.13,510/- in place of Rs.12,403/- in favour of the petitioner. as per Govt. guidelines.

(II) For issuance of an order, direction or writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to revise the pension of the petitioner

and to pay the arrear of pension amount upto tune of Rs.2,65,564/- up to December, 2016.

(III) For issuance of an order, direction or writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to pay the interest thereon on the

above amount on market rate of interest.

(IV) Any other relief/reliefs may be granted in favour of the petitioner for which he is found entitled to in the facts and circumstances of the

case.

Having heard the parties, this Court is of the considered opinion that the nature of the dispute is such that it would warrant an adjudication by the

respondent authorities. Hence, I grant a liberty to the petitioner to approach before the respondent no. 2-the Principal Secretary, Finance Department,

Government of Bihar, Patna by filing an appropriate representation, stating out his claim as also annexing relevant judgments in his support, as he may

deem fit and proper, within a period of four weeks from today, whereupon the respondent no.2 shall pass a reasoned and speaking order within a

period of 12 weeks thereafter.

It goes without saying that respondent no.2 will be solely responsible for non-compliance of the order passed by this Court within time, as aforesaid.

With the aforesaid observation and direction, this writ application stands disposed of.