Anjani Kumar v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.8639 of 2017 ====================================================== Anjani Kumar, son of Late Baidya Nath Sinha, resident of Vaidyasenkunj Shiv Shakti Colony, P.S.- Civil Lines, District- Gaya (Bihar). ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

2. Principal Secretary, Department of Human Resources Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

3. District Magistrate, Gaya.

4. District Programme Officer (Estab.), Gaya.

5. District Education Officer, Gaya. null null

6. Block Development Officer, Mohanpur, Gaya.

7. Block Education Officer, Mohanpur, Gaya.

... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Ashutosh Ranjan Pandey- AAG15 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPADHYAY ORAL ORDER 15-02-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the counsel appearing on behalf of the State.

The grievance of the petitioner in the present writ application is non-payment of salary of the wife of the petitioner who died after sustaining injury in road accident in 2014. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits that the wife of the petitioner was paid salary for the period June, 2014 to September, 2014.

In the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, the writ petition is disposed of with direction to the respondent no.4 the District Programme Officer (Establishment),Gaya to examine

Patna High Court CWJC No.8639 of 2017(2) dt.15-02-2018 2/2 the claim of the petitioner for payment of salary of his wife for the period indicated hereinabove after verification of the relevant record within a maximum of period of sixty days from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order in view of the fact that factual inquiry as to the validity of the appointment and the fact whether of the wife of the petitioner has actually worked during the aforesaid period is to be examined by the respondents after verification of the record. It is made clear this court has not expressed any opinion on the claim of the petitioner, it shall be the obligation of the respondents to examine the claim of the petitioner in accordance with law after verification of the record within the time frame indicated hereinabove.

With the aforesaid, the writ petition stands disposed of. (Anil Kumar Upadhyay, J) Ravi/- U