Manju Devi v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.3808 of 2019 ====================================================== Manju Devi, wife of Late Dineshwar Prasad Singh, retired Correspondence Clerk, resident of Village-Saropatti, P.O- Lalpur Saropatti, Police StationSinheshwar, District- Madhepura ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar, through the Principal Secretary, Water Resources Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna 2.

The Chief Engineer, Water Resources Department, Birhpur, District- Supaul 3.

The Executive Engineer, Irrigation Division, Saharsa, District- Saharsa 4.

The Accountant General, Bihar, Birchand Patel Path, Patna, Bihar ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Santosh Kumar Verma, Adv For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Vinay Kriti Singh (GA-2) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 01-03-2019 The petitioner, who is widow of an employee who died after serving for 38 years in the Department on 18.04.2007 is aggrieved by the fact that despite the employee/late husband of the petitioner being entitled for first and second ACP and other financial benefits, the same has not been given to him and consequently the family pension has not been re-fixed accordingly.

2. It has further been submitted that other employees who were not granted the aforesaid benefits and had approached this Court for the needful, were later

Patna High Court CWJC No.3808 of 2019 dt.01-03-2019 2/2 granted such financial progression by the Department. The representations of the petitioner before the concerned authorities several times have not yielded any result till date.

3. Under the aforesaid circumstances, the petitioner is directed to make a detailed representation before the Chief Engineer, Water Resources Department, Supaul/Saharsa within a period of four weeks, which representation shall be disposed off by the concerned respondent within a further period of eight weeks by a reasoned order.

4. Needless to state that if the claim of the petitioner is found to be tenable, necessary sequel order shall be passed without any delay within the aforesaid period.

5. With the aforesaid observation/direction, the writ petition is disposed off.

(Ashutosh Kumar, J) Shageer/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date 06/03/2019