Md. Saleh Salim vs The State Of Bihar And Ors
2021 Latest Caselaw 1294 Patna

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                    Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.23288 of 2018
     ======================================================

Md. Saleh Salim Son of Md Atufat Hussain Resident of Village Dahibhat Police. Station- Terhagachh Distt- Kishanganj.

... ... Petitioner/s Versus

1. The State Of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Revenue and Land Reforms Deptt. Govt. of Bihar, Patna

2. The District Magistrate, Banka

3. The District Additional Collector, Revenue and Land Reforms Department Distt. Banka.

4. The Circle officer, Shambhuganj, District - Banka.

... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

     For the Petitioner/s   :      None
     For the State          :      Mr. Rakesh Kr. Srivastava, AC to GP 15

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 05-03-2021

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

counsel for the respondents.

2. The present writ petition has been filed "for a direction

to the respondents to pay the salary for the month of February

2017 and arrears of salary on the basis of seventh Pay Revision

and to pay the retiral benefits i.e. amount of Gratuity, amount

of annual increment, amount of Group Insurance and amount of

Earned leave all with 10% interest."

3. None appears on behalf of the petitioner when the

matter is called. It transpires from the record that the petitioner

had not appeared on any of the dates when the matter was taken Patna High Court CWJC No.23288 of 2018 dt.05-03-2021

up in the past on 10.07.2020, 21.08.2020, 18.09.2020 and

13.01.2021.

4. Learned counsel for the State refers to various

paragraphs of the counter affidavit stating that all the admissible

dues of the petitioner have been paid and/or processed. It is

therefore submitted that the grievances of the petitioner have

already been redressed.

5. In view of the consistent non-representation of the

petitioner, this Court is of the view that no fruitful purpose

would be served in adjourning the matter yet again.

6. Having regard to the stand of the State in its counter

affidavit, the writ petition is disposed of with liberty to the

petitioner to file a fresh representation in respect of any

remaining grievances within a period of four weeks from today.

(Vikash Jain, J)

HR/-

AFR/NAFR                        NAFR
CAV DATE                        -
Uploading Date                  08.05.2021
Transmission Date               -