@JUDGMENTTAG-ORDER
Shailesh Kr. Sinha, J.@mdashHeard learned Counsel for the Petitioner and the State.
2. The grievance of the Petitioner is that the father of the Petitioner retired as Assistant Sub-Inspector (Jamadar) from B.M.P. at C.T.S. Nath
Nagar on 1.7.1962 and after his retirement he was drawing his pension under P.P.O. No. 52299 till he died on 8.6.1998. As after death of his
father, the mother of the Petitioner was in Annexure-R/3 to the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the Treasury Officer, the matter shall be
examined as per. law granted family pension. The mother of the Petitioner later on died on 24th December, 2003.
3. It is submitted on behalf of the Petitioner the pension payable to the father of the Petitioner was not correctly fixed as per the Govt. Resolution
No. 11557 dated 22nd December, 1993 issued by the Department of Finance, Govt, of Bihar for the period 1971 to 31.3.1997, and as such, the
Petitioner filed writ petition vide C.W.J.C. No. 10664 of 2004 for redressal of the aforesaid grievances which was disposed of alongwith some
other writ applications by a common order dated 8.9.2004. Since the grievance of the Petitioner was not redressed despite the direction of this
Court, Petitioner filed contempt application vide M.J.C. No. 1666 of 2005 which was disposed of on 14.2.2008 with liberty to the Petitioner to
represent, his case before the concerned authority if still some grievance has remained to be considered and further directed that in case such
representation is filed the same be disposed of within the time indicated in the order.
4. Learned Counsel submits that pursuant to the liberty granted as aforesaid the Petitioner submitted his representation dated 7th April, 2008
(Annexure-3). The aforesaid representation was however received, but the Respondent No. 4 did not pass any order thereon. The Accountant
General (Respondent No. 5) communicated the Petitioner as per the letter dated 29.5.2008 (Annexure-5) that no revision of family
pension/pension is required without considering the points raised by the Petitioner in his representation.
5. Learned Counsel for the State submits that in case Petitioner represents the matter again after complying the necessary requirements as
communicated to him in the letter of the Treasury Officer, Aurangabad (Respondent No. 6) vide letter dated 30th December, 2009 as contained
6. In the above circumstances, learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that for expeditious disposal of the pending claims as highlighted in this
writ application, Petitioner proposes to file a fresh representation before the Respondent No. 3 with necessary details as sought in the letter dated
30.12.2009 (Annexure-R/3).
7. In view of the above, in case such representation stating details of unpaid claims as also the copy of the relevant documents, if any, in support of
the claim alongwith the certified copy of the present order is filed within a period of four weeks from today, the grievances of the Petitioner raised
in the representation shall be considered and disposed of by a reasoned order in accordance with law expeditiously preferably within a period of
four months on receipt of such representation. In case the representation of the Petitioner finds favour, the Respondent No. 3 shall simultaneously
issue necessary orders communicating the Respondent No. 5 i.e. the Accountant General so that the Accountant General on receipt of such order
may issue fresh authorization for payment after making necessary verification, if any. In course of such verification if the Accountant General finds
any ambiguity the same shall be again informed to the Respondent No. 3 for its immediate consideration and compliance so that the matter may be
considered afresh if required. However, the Accountant General on consideration finds no ambiguity the necessary authorization for payment in
question be issued within a period of four weeks on receipt of the sanctioned order from the competent authority to enable payment of the
admitted dues to the Petitioner with interest permissible under the rules.
8. The writ application stands disposed of with the above observations/di rections.