IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CWJC No.5860 of 2004
Dharmapal
Versus
The State Of Bihar & Ors
-----------
11. 30.06.2011 It appears that through some inadvertence order no. 9
dated 27.6.2011 has been typed and pronounced though the text
thereof related to some other case.
Order no. 10 also passed on 27.6.2011 in this case
and requires to be pronounced.
Let order no. 9 dated 27.6.2011 be treated as recalled
as of no effect.
Learned counsel for the petitioner appears and
crystallizes his grievance with regard to DA based on the amount
of Rs. 2575/- instead of the full amount of his basic salary.
He invites attention to the fixation of his pay as
contained in Annexure No.5 whereby no amount of D.A. was
found admissible. Thereafter by Annexure No.8, D.A. appears to
have been found admissible but on a lower amount of Rs. 2575/-
It has further been observed that the petitioner has
overdrawn a sum of Rs. 86,360/- but the petitioner submits that
the same does not appear to be based on any materials.
A counter affidavit has no doubt been filed on behalf
of the respondents but the main grievance of the petitioner does
not appear to have been addressed.
Let the respondents file a supplementary counter
affidavit making specific and clear averments with regard to the
basis for calculating the D.A. as done in Annexure No. 8 and also
clarify the grounds for observing that the petitioner has already
received excess payment of Rs. 86,360/-
Put up this matter again after two weeks under the
same heading.
Fahad ( Vikash Jain, J. )