- (1.) Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
(2.) The petitioner, in this writ application, has prayed for a direction upon the Respondents to pay him the balance of his retiral dues, which has not been paid to him, the details of which has been mentioned in Paragraph 33 of the writ application.
(3.) It appears that earlier, the petitioner had filed a writ application with similar prayer, vide C.W.J.C. No. 3345 of 1994 (R), followed by a contempt application. While disposing of the aforementioned writ application, by its order dated 17.07.2001, this Court had observed that even after payment of the retiral dues made by the Respondents, if the petitioner feels dissatisfied with the quantum, he would be at liberty to avail the alternative remedy for filing a civil suit in the Civil Court, if so advised. The contention of the petitioner is that he has not been advised to file or avail the statutory alternative remedy. Rather, the petitioner has also a right to file a writ application demanding payment of his retiral benefits from the Respondent-State.;