Patna High Court
Santosh KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- ANSHUMAN
Holding
The Court held that the petitioners must first file a fresh representation before the Treasury Officer, and therefore the writ petition was disposed without granting mandamus.
Summary
The petitioners, four former government employees, filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the Treasury Officer of Sasaram to credit their deducted C.P.F. and other statutory amounts, along with employer contributions and accrued interest, into a Permanent Retirement Account Number (PRAN) under the new National Pension Scheme for the period December 2007 to March 2010. They alleged that despite multiple letters and reminders from the Drawing and Disbursing Officer of the Civil Court, Sasaram, the Treasury Officer had taken no action. The respondents argued that only one petitioner had filed a representation, questioning the standing of the others. The High Court, without adjudicating the merits, ordered the petitioners to file a fresh, collective representation before the Treasury Officer within 30 days and directed the officer to issue a reasoned order within 60 days after consulting the Drawing and Disbursing Officer. Consequently, the writ petition was disposed without granting the relief sought.
Issues considered
- Whether the High Court can issue a writ of mandamus directing the Treasury Officer to credit the pension amounts without a fresh representation from the petitioners.
- Whether the petitioners have complied with the procedural requirement of filing a representation before seeking judicial intervention.
Subjects
- mandamus
- pension
- C.P.F.
- NPS
- representation
- administrative law
- High Court
- Bihar
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.4656 of 2026
======================================================
1. Santosh Kumar Son of Purushotum Prasad, Resident of Mohalla- Kumahar
Toli, Sohni Patti, Police Station- Buxar, District- Buxar
2. Krishna Mohan Singh Son of Baleshwar Singh, Resident of Village-
Basantpur, Police Station- Aara Sadar, District- Bhojpur
3. Mahendra Kumar Singh Son of Sadhu Singh, Resident of Village-
Chaumukha, Pirauta Police Station- Krishnagarh, District- Bhojpur
4. Saroj Narayan Mishra Son of Brij Bihar Mishra, Resident of Mohalla- Civi
Line, Police Station- Buxar, District- Buxar
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna
2. The Principal Secretary, Department of Finance, Government of Bihar, Patna
3. The Treasury Officer, Sasaram, District- Rohtas
4. The Drawing and Disbursing Officer, Civil Court, Sasaram, District- Rohtas
5. The Managing Director, Protean e-Gov Technologies Limited (formerly
NSDL e-Governance Infrastructure Limited), 1st Floor, Times Tower,
Kamala Mills Compound, Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai -
400013
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Narendra Kumar, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Anant Pd. Singh (SC-15)
Mrs. Deepika Sharma (AC to SC-15)
For the Resp. no.4 : Mr. Satyendra Narayan Singh, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN
ORAL ORDER
2 30-03-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned
counsel for the State and learned counsel for the Respondent
no.4.
2. The present writ petition has been filed for the
following relief/s:-
“I. For issuance of a writ in the nature of
Patna High Court CWJC No.4656 of 2026(2) dt.30-03-2026
2/3
mandamus or any other appropriate
writ/writs, order(s), direction(s) commanding
and directing the Respondents to credit the
amount of C.P.F. and other statutory
deduction deducted from Salary of the
Petitioners along with contribution of the
employer during the period of December,
2007 to March, 2010 into Permanent
Retirement Account Number [PRAN] under
new pension scheme [NPS] along with due
accrued interest equivalent to Net Assets Value
[NAV] of the units of the non-credited amount
as per current market value.
II. Any other orders, direction/directions to
which the petitioners are deemed entitle.”
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that for
fulfillment of their grievances, the Treasury Officer, Sasaram,
Rohtas (Respondent no.3) is the competent person. Counsel
submits that the letters and reminders were sent from the
Drawing and Disbursing Officer, Civil Court, Sasaram, Rohtas
(Respondent no.4) to the Treasury Officer, Sasaram, Rohtas
(Respondent no.3) several times, but no decision has been taken
by the Respondent no.3 till date. The last option left to the
petitioners is filing the present writ petition and demand writ in
the nature of mandamus.
Patna High Court CWJC No.4656 of 2026(2) dt.30-03-2026
3/3
4. Learned counsel appearing for Respondent no.4
submits that it is true that the Drawing and Disbursing Officer,
Civil Court, Sasaram, Rohtas has written letter to Respondent
no.3. But, from the record, it transpires that the representation
has been filed by only one petitioner namely, Santosh Kumar
(petitioner no.1).
5. In the light of the submissions made, this Court
without entering into the merit or demerit of this case hereby
directs all the petitioners to file a fresh representation along with
a copy of this order before the Treasury Officer, Sasaram,
Rohtas (Respondent no.3), within 30 days from today. Upon
receipt of the same, the Respondent no.3 is directed to pass a
reasoned and speaking order on the petitioners’ representation,
within 60 days thereafter. It is made clear that prior to passing a
reasoned and speaking order, the Respondent no.3 shall consult
with the Respondent no.4 within the said period.
6. Accordingly, with the aforesaid direction, this writ
petition stands disposed off.
(Dr. Anshuman, J)
Divyansh/-
U
Checking your session…