Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Ramesh Kumar SinhaversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
DISPOSED

Holding

The court held that the respondents must correct the petitioner’s name in the Pension Payment Order and pay the family pension within six weeks.

Summary

The petitioner, Ramesh Kumar Sinha, filed a writ petition seeking correction of his name in the Pension Payment Order (P.P.O.) No. 20151112168, where it was erroneously recorded as 'Ramesh Kumar Singh', resulting in denial of his family pension. He alleged that the mistake prevented the pension from being released and requested the court to direct the respondent authorities to amend the P.P.O. and grant the pension. The petitioner’s counsel submitted that the District Programme Officer had already issued a corrective instruction dated 10‑12‑2025. The court examined whether the petitioner was entitled to judicial intervention to enforce the correction and payment of the pension. It held that the respondents were bound to implement the correction within six weeks and to settle the family pension accordingly. Accordingly, the writ petition was disposed of with directions to the Accountant General to effect the correction and release the pension.

Issues considered

  • Whether the petitioner is entitled to correction of his name in the Pension Payment Order
  • Whether the petitioner is entitled to family pension despite the clerical error
  • Whether the court can direct the respondent authorities to correct the P.P.O. and release the pension

Subjects

  • family pension
  • name correction
  • Pension Payment Order
  • writ petition
  • administrative law
  • public service
  • court order

Judgment

                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                            Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.20354 of 2025
                 ======================================================
                 Ramesh Kumar Sinha Son of Late Rajendra Prasad Singh, Resident of
                 Mohalla- Jyoti Vihar, P.S- Industrial, District- Bhagalpur.

                                                                                 ... ... Petitioner/s

                                                      Versus

           1.    The State of Bihar through the Additional Chief Secretary, Education
                 Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

           2.    The Additional Chief Secretary, Education Department, Government of
                 Bihar, Patna.

           3.    The Director, Primary Education, Education Department, Government of
                 Bihar, Patna.

           4.    The District Education Officer, Bhagalpur.

           5.    The District Programme officer, (Establishment) Education, Bhagalpur.

           6.    The Accountant General, Bihar, Patna.

                                                                               ... ... Respondent/s

                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s   :        Mr. Atul Kumar, Advocate
                 For the Respondent/s   :        Mr. Vikas Kumar, Standing Counsel (11)
                 For the AG             :        Mr. Ram Kinker Choubey, Advocate
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT KUMAR
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   16-01-2026                     Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned

                   counsel for the Accountant General and learned counsel for the

                   State.

                                 2. The writ petition has been filed for the following

                   reliefs :-

                                            “For issuance of an appropriate writ(s),
Patna High Court CWJC No.20354 of 2025(2) dt.16-01-2026
                                           2/3




                          order(s), direction(s) to the respondent authorities
                          to correct the name of the petitioner in the P.P.O.
                          Book P.P.O No. 20151112168 of the wife of
                          petitioner while the name of the petitioner is
                          Ramesh Kumar Sinha, it has been mistakenly
                          written as Ramesh Kumar Singh in the P.P.O Book,
                          P.P.O No. 20151112168of wife of the petitioner
                          Family Pension is not being received due to 'Sign'
                          being typed instead of 'Sinha' and direction to the
                          respondent authorities to give family pension to the
                          petitioner by correcting the name of petitioner.
                          And/or any other appropriate relief(s) to the
                          petitioner for which he may be found entitled in the
                          eye of law.”

                      3. At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioner by

          referring to paragraph 5 of the counter affidavit, which has been

          served to the petitioner during the course of the day and

          submits that for necessary correction in the Pension Payment

          Order No.20151112168, appropriate instructions / directions

          have already been sent by the District Programme Officer,

          Establishment,        Bhagalpur        vide     Letter   No.6132   dated

          10.12.2025.

                      4. Learned counsel representing Office of Accountant

          General is directed to take all necessary steps, if such orders

          have been received by them, for making necessary correction in
           Patna High Court CWJC No.20354 of 2025(2) dt.16-01-2026
                                                      3/3




                     the P.P.O., which shall be made within a period of six weeks

                     from today and family pension of the petitioner shall be settled

                     in favour of this petitioner within the same time and decision so

                     taken shall also be communicated to the petitioner.

                                 5. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of.



                                                  (Ajit Kumar, J)
sharun/-

U


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.