Patna High Court
Jitendra Singh vs The Patna High Court, Patna on 26 November, 2019
Author: Ahsanuddin Amanullah
Bench: Ahsanuddin Amanullah
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.23315 of 2019
======================================================
Jitendra Singh Son of late Kashi Nath Singh, Resident of Village- Taranpur,
P.S. Gaurichak, District- Patna.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The Patna High Court, Patna through its Registrar.
2. The Registrar General, Patna High Court, Patna.
3. The Treasury Officer, New Secretariat, Patna.
4. The Accountant General, Bihar, Patna.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Subodh Kumar Jha, Advocate
For the H.C. : Mr. Piyush Lall, Advocate
For the A.G. : Mr. Kumar Priya Ranjan, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 26-11-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner; learned counsel for the respondents no. 1 and 2 and learned counsel for the Accountant General.
2. The petitioner has moved the Court for payment of arrears of pension of his grandmother who was getting family pension from the year 2005 and died in the year 2018 at the age of 106 years.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that she being an illiterate lady was not aware of the provision that upon attaining the age of 80 years there is substantive enhancement in the family pension and, thus, after her death the petitioner being aware has made a representation to the concerned authority.
Patna High Court CWJC No.23315 of 2019 dt.26-11-2019 2/2
4. The Court is surprised at the conduct of the petitioner. The cause of action arose in the year 1992 and thereafter even the person who was entitled to such benefit died in the year 2018 and after that the petitioner is seeking a benefit which may have accrued to his grandmother. Besides the claim being stale, the Court has no hesitation to observe that the intention is also not bona fide. The petitioner is trying to extract something from the death of his grandmother and most importantly, the beneficiary today is not alive.
5. In the aforesaid background, the Court finds the petition to be thoroughly frivolous, which, in the considered opinion of the Court, deserved to be dismissed with cost. However, by way of indulgence the Court refrains from doing so.
6. Accordingly, the application stands dismissed.
(Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J) Anjani/-
AFR/NAFR U