Patna High Court
Md. JakirversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- AJIT KUMAR
Holding
The writ petition was disposed of, with the Court directing the respondents to release the pension amount and remove the bank account hold within two weeks.
Summary
The petitioner, Md. Jakir, challenged a letter dated 03.05.2024 issued by a State Bank of India official directing him to refund Rs.27,27,039 that was allegedly overpaid as old‑age pension and threatening to freeze his bank account. He sought a writ of certiorari to quash the letter, a mandamus to release his pension and unfreeze the account, and a declaration that excess amounts paid without fault cannot be recovered. The respondents argued that the issues had already been settled by the Coordinating Bench in Rameshwar Ram v. Union of India (CWJC No. 288 of 2023). The Court noted the earlier judgment and directed the authorities to release the amount due to the petitioner and remove the hold on his account within two weeks, failing which the petitioner may seek further interlocutory relief. Consequently, the writ petition was disposed of with the said directions.
Issues considered
- Whether the letter directing refund and account hold can be quashed by a writ of certiorari
- Whether a writ of mandamus can be issued to release the pension and unfreeze the bank account
- Whether an excess pension amount paid without fault or misrepresentation can be recovered
- Whether the prior judgment in Rameshwar Ram v. Union of India precludes further relief
Subjects
- old age pension
- excess payment
- refund
- bank account freeze
- certiorari
- mandamus
- writ petition
- High Court
- precedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.5954 of 2025
======================================================
Md. Jakir son of Late Sukar Mohammad, resident of village -Bikrampur, P.O.
and P.S. Bihpur, District-Bhagalpur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Principal Secretary, Road Construction Department, Government of
Bihar, Patna.
3. The Accountant General, Bihar, Patna.
4. The Chief General Manager, State Bank of India, Branch ACB, Jhandapur,
District -Bhagalpur.
5. The Assistant General Manager, State Bank of India, Branch ACB,
Jhandapur, District -Bhagalpur.
6. The Senior Treasury Officer, Bhagalpur, District - Bhagalpur
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. S.B.K Mangalam, Adv.
Mr.Awnish Kumar, Adv.
For the Respondent/s : Additional Advocate General (7)
For AG, Bihar : Mr. Raj Nandan Prasad,
Mr. Vishesh Kumar Singh, Advocates
For SBI : Mr. Rakesh Kumar Singh, Adv.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
3 09-04-2026 Heard Mr. S.B.K Mangalam, learned counsel for the
petitioner, learned counsel for the State, learned counsel
representing the Accountant General, Bihar, Patna and learned
counsel appearing for the State Bank of India.
2. The writ petition has been preferred for the
following relief(s):-
“I) For issuance of an appropriate
writ in the nature of CERTIORARI for
quashing the letter dated 03.05.2024 issued
Patna High Court CWJC No.5954 of 2025(3) dt.09-04-2026
2/4
under the signature of the Respondent no.4
and contained in his letter no. M/24-
25/70653 dated 03.05.2024, whereby and
where under he has directed the petitioner
for refund of Rs.27,27,039/- to his pension
account which was wrongly paid to him
because of wrong calculation of his
entitlement for Old Age Pension, and on
failure he has warned the petitioner that for
adjustment of the said amount apart from
monthly deduction, his account can also be
put on hold.
(II) For issuance of an
appropriate writ in the nature of
MANDAMUS commanding and directing the
Respondent Authorities for release of
pension to the petitioner and also to allow
him to operate his Bank Account having
Account No.11725758641 by removing the
hold from the same, on the ground that the
excess payment which has been paid to the
petitioner was released by the authorities
Patna High Court CWJC No.5954 of 2025(3) dt.09-04-2026
3/4
after calculation by themselves and if it is
not a case of misrepresentation leading
payment.
III) For a declaration that when
an excess amount is paid to a retired
employee without any fault/ fraud
/misrepresentation on his part, the excess
amount paid to him cannot be recovered and
he cannot be stopped from withdrawing his
pension by putting hold upon operation of
his Bank Account.
iv) For issuance of any other
appropriate writ/writs, order / orders
direction/ directions for which the writ
petitioner would be entitled under the facts
and circumstances of the case.
3. Learned counsel representing the petitioner
submits that the issues have already been put at rest by the Co-
ordinate Bench in the case of Rameshwar Ram v. The Union
Of India & Ors passed in CWJC No. 288 of 2023.
4. On the other hand, learned counsel for State Bank
of India and as also learned counsel for the State submit that
Patna High Court CWJC No.5954 of 2025(3) dt.09-04-2026
4/4
since the issues have already been given a quietus in light of the
order so passed in the case of Rameshwar Ram (supra), the
authorities may be directed to take final decision.
5. In view of the aforesaid judgment, it is expected
that final decision shall be taken and the amount for which the
authorities are entitled to, will be withheld and the rest amount
shall be paid to the petitioner within a period of two weeks from
today and the petitioner would not be subjected to any further
hindrance in operating his bank account.
6. In case, such decisions are not taken within two
weeks, then the petitioner will be at liberty to file an
Interlocutory Application for revival of the writ application.
7. The writ petition stands disposed of.
(Ajit Kumar, J)
perwez
U
Checking your session…