1 2025:CGHC:53803 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 4165 of 2019 1 - Maniram Yadav S/o Late Ramadin Yadav Aged About 77 Years Retd. Headmaster, Government Sukrikala Primary School, Block Kartala, District Korba Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, School Education Department, Mahanadi Bhavan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh., 2 - Accountant General, Treasury, Account And Pension, Zero Point, Baloda Bazar Road, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Shri S.K. Kushwaha, Advocate. For Respondent No.1 : Shri Aman Deep Singh, Panel Lawyer. For Respondent No.2 : Shri RK Gupta, Standing Counsel. Hon'ble Shri Deepak Kumar Tiwari, J Order on Board 04/11/2025 : 1. The present Petition has been filed for issuance of direction to the respondents to pay the balance amount of Rs.60,186/- towards GPF along with interest. KRISHNA KUMAR BARVE Digitally signed by KRISHNA KUMAR BARVE Date: 2025.11.04 16:09:04 +0530 2 2. This is the 2nd round of litigation. Earlier in WPS No.5410/2018 vide order dated 23rd August, 2018, the matter was referred to the High Power Committee and the said Committee was directed to scrutinize the case of the petitioner in a time bound manner. Thereafter the said Committee has scrutinized the case of the petitioner and vide order dated 14th March, 2019 reached to the conclusion that no payment remains in favour of the employee concerned, and accordingly, an order has been passed, which is challenged in this writ petition. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the High Power Committee has not verified the pass book and, therefore, calculation which was approved by the said Committee is erroneous and the petitioner is entitled for the GPF amount of Rs.60,186/-, as per the pass book. 4. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents would support the impugned order. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 has also drawn attention of the Court towards the passbook for the financial year 2003- 04 relied upon by the petitioner which is annexed with the writ petition as Annexure-P/2, duly certified by the Block Education Officer which contained subscription and monthly deduction. Perusal of Annexure-P/2 would show that a wrong calculation towards total amount of credit has been made which has been shown as Rs.13,189/-, though the same, if recalculated in a proper manner, comes to Rs.12,354/-. He would submit that the said pass book could not be relied upon unless the entries are authenticated. 3 5. Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and also considering the passbook entries for the financial year 2003-04, which is relied upon by counsel for the petitioner, this Court is of the opinion that calculation of total deduction appears to be erroneous, which is not disputed by counsel for the petitioner and the High Power Committee on the basis of Service Book, BTR, Cash Book and Acquittance Roll etc recorded a finding that no amount is due to be paid to the petitioner. The reasoning assigned by the High Power Committee appears to be just and proper. 6. No case for interference by this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is made out. 7. The Writ Petition being bereft of any substance deserves to be and is hereby dismissed. Sd/- (Deepak Kumar Tiwari) Judge Barve