Bina Devi v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.1324 of 2014 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 9478 of 2010 ======================================================

1. Bina Devi Wife Of Late Ram Parikshit Singh Resident Of VillageBarahiya, Tola- Ramcharan, Ward No. 5, P.S.- Barahiya, DistrictLakhisarai. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State Of Bihar, Through The Principal Secretary, Higher Education Department, Bihar, Namely S. Shiv Kumar

2. Veer Kunwar Singh University, Ara, Through Vice-Chancellor, DistrictBhojpur At Ara, Namely Dr. Azhar Hussain

3. The Vice-Chancellor, Veer Kunwar Singh University, Ara, DistrictBhojpur At Ara, Namely Dr. Azhar Hussain

4. The Registrar, Veer Kunwar Singh University, Ara, District- Bhojpur At Ara, Namely Manoj Kumar

5. The Principal, S.B. College, Ara, District- Bhojpur At Ara, Namely Dr. Kanhiya Prasad Sinha.

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Kamlesh Kumar Sharma For the Respondent/s : Mr. Nawal Kishore Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KISHORE KUMAR MANDAL ORAL ORDER 23-09-2015 Heard the Counsel for the petitioner and the University. A show cause has been filed on behalf of the University affirmed by the Registrar.

The application alleges willful and deliberate disobedience/disregard of the order dated 1.7.2013 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 9478 of 2010. The writ petition was filed for a direction to grant family pension to the petitioner as her deceased husband had indisputably continued in service for more than 10 years. The University had sanctioned the family pension but was

Patna High Court MJC No.1324 of 2014 (3) dt.23-09-2015 2/3 subsequently withdrawn. Having regard to the submissions made on behalf of the parties, the writ petition was disposed of directing the University to continue payment of family pension on the basis of earlier sanction made in her favour and/or pass fresh order sanctioning the pension. The arrears of family pension accruing to the petitioner were also directed to be paid. In the show cause, the opposite party has stated that the communication dated 27.6.2008 by which the Bank was restrained from crediting family pension in the pension account of the petitioner has been withdrawn vide communication dated 1.4.2015 copy whereof has been enclosed as Annexure-A, on perusal whereof it appears that the University has withdrawn the said order by which the Bank was restrained from crediting the family pension amount in the account of the petitioner. The Bank is now required to pay the family pension including the arrears to the petitioner.

Counsel for the petitioner submits that she is now getting the family pension regularly but the arrears have not been paid. The petitioner may agitate this grievance before the Bank in the light of the communication of the University as contained in Annexure-A. If any clarification is required, the Bank shall communicate with the University which shall be clarified.

Patna High Court MJC No.1324 of 2014 (3) dt.23-09-2015 3/3 The contempt application is dismissed.

(Kishore Kumar Mandal, J) Pankaj/- U