Gauri Thakur @ Gauri Devi v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.6646 of 2016 =========================================================== Gauri Thakur @ Gauri Devi, W/o Late Dr. Radha Kant Thakur 'Raman' Resident of Village- Rampati, (Vishahara Tola), P.S. Rajnagar, District Madhubani. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary.

2. The Principal Secretary, Department of Health, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

3. The Vice-Chancellor, Kameshwar Singh Darbhanga Sanskrit University, Darbhanga.

4. The Registrar, Kameshwar Singh Darbhanga Sanskrit University, Darbhanga.

5. The Principal, Govt. Maharani Rameshwari Bhartiya Chikitsa Vigyan Sansthan, Mohanpur, Darbhanga.

6. The Treasury Officer, Madhubani.

7. The Accountant General, Bihar, Patna.

8. The Branch Manager, State Bank of India, Branch- Bhagwatipur, Madhubani.

9. The Treasury Officer, Darbhanga.

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

For the Petitioner/s :

For the Respondent/s :

=========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 11-04-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner; State; K.S.D. Sanskrit University and State Bank of India.

2. In view of the stand taken by the State in the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondent no. 9, it appears that the grievance of the petitioner stands redressed. However, as learned counsel for the petitioner had pointed out to the Court that from the P.P.O., it was not clear as to whether the benefit of revised family pension in terms of the recommendations of the 6th and 7th Pay Revision Commission were also given to the petitioner and also paid

Patna High Court CWJC No.6646 of 2016 dt.11-04-2018 2/2 to her, the Court had called upon learned counsel for the State Bank of India to take specific instructions. He has reverted to the Court stating that as per instructions received from the C.P.P.C., Patna such benefits have been credited into the account of the petitioner.

3. In view of the specific stand taken on behalf of the State Bank of India as well as the C.P.P.C., Patna, which is the main processing centre of the State Bank of India for payment of pension, the writ petition having served its purpose, stands disposed off.

4. However, the Court gives liberty to the petitioner to verify as to whether the admissible revision of pension/family pension as well as arrears, if any, have been credited into her account right form the date they became due. If it reveals that the same has not been done, the petitioner is permitted to file an appropriate application seeking action against the concerned respondents for having taken a false stand before the Court on the basis of which the Court has disposed off the writ petition.

(Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J) Anjani/- AFR/NAFR U