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
6 paragraphs · 251 wordsHeard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned AC to AAG 15 for the State.
Pursuant to order dated 17.09.2019, the District Programme Officer (Establishment), Siwan is personally present for reasons recorded in the order.
He has also filed 2nd supplementary show cause in terms of the said order. Details of calculation made under various heads have been brought on record and further with regard to payment of interest upon pension and gratuity, according to the authorities, the same comes to Rs. 1,52,091/- for which a cheque in favour of the petitioner has also been brought. The same has been handed over to learned counsel for the petitioner, however, without prejudice to his rights and claim.
From the aforesaid, the Court finds that the order dated 20.07.2017 passed in CWJC No. 14424 of 2016, has been complied with.
Accordingly, the application stands disposed off.
However, with regard to any calculation error which the petitioner may find to have been committed by the authorities, it shall be open to him to file a detailed representation within four weeks. If the same is done, the officer present shall get the matter verified from the records and pass a reasoned order within four weeks from the date of filing of the representation. If anything further is found due and payable, the same shall be paid to the petitioner within three weeks from the date of passing of the order. 7. Personal appearance of the officer stands dispensed with.
