- (1.) The point is raised as to the maintainability of this writ petition having barred under Order 2 Rule 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure and explanation appended to Section 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
(2.) The facts are not disputed. In a previous litigation being W.P. 16738 (W) of 2010, the petitioner challenged the action of the competent authority in deducting and/or adjusting certain amount as excess payment paid to the petitioner from the retrial benefits. In the said writ petition, a report was called for from the District Inspector of School (SE), Purba Medinipur which revealed that such excess payment was not paid on commission of any fraud or misrepresentation by the petitioner. The said writ petition was disposed of on December 7, 2010 declaring the entitlement of the petitioner for refund of an amount which deducted from his retrial benefit.
(3.) It would be profitable to quote the excerpts of the order which reads thus: " He shall also be entitled to full retrial benefits calculated on the basis of last pay drawn at the time of his retirement. All financial benefits in terms of this order including arrears shall be released in his favour as early as possible but not later than four months from date of receipt of a copy of this order." ;