Raj Kishore Pd. Yadav v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.4329 of 2011 ====================================================== Raj Kishore Prasad Yadav, S/O Shri Bhola Prasad Yadav, R/O Khandwara, Post & P.S.- Siwan, presently posted as Peon in D.A.V. High School, Siwan. .... .... Petitioner.

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

2. Shri Kamal Kishore Singh, Director Secondary Education, Budh Marg, Patna.

3. Sri Radha Krishna Singh Yadav District Education Officer, Siwan. .... .... Opposite Parties.

====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner : Mr. Tej Bahadur Singh, Sr. Adv. Mr. Brisketu Sharan Pandey, Adv.

For the Opposite Parties : Mr. Jaishankar Barnwal, SC-1 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAVANITI PRASAD SINGH ORAL ORDER 15-04-2015 Mr. Jaishankar Barnwal, learned counsel appearing for the State places on record his letter to the Director, Secondary Education, Government of Bihar, Patna stating that in compliance to the orders of this Court in the writ petition a fund of Rs. 1,46,623.00 be allotted for payment to the petitioner. This letter is said to have been sent on 14.04.2015 (yesterday). This Court regrets to note that a Class-IV employee was made to fight for his basic salary from 2006 before this Court and even after his writ petition was allowed in the year 2011 for realizing/recovering the same, he had to again initiate further proceeding in the year 2011 itself and it is after all this endeavour that payment is being sought to be made.

Considering the aforesaid, this application stands

Patna High Court MJC No.4329 of 2011 (04) dt.15-04-2015 2/2 disposed of with a direction to the District Programme Officer Establishment (Education), Siwan that the said amount be paid to the petitioner within one month from today. The sole responsibility of which would be on the District Programme Officer aforesaid and failure to adhere to the time schedule will make him liable for contempt. In addition to the above, for the harassment caused to the petitioner by the State, the petitioner would also be liable to a cost of Rs.10,000.00 (Rupees Ten Thousand) which would be paid to the petitioner in addition to the above dues and would be realized from the person/persons responsible for the delay who would be identified by the District Programme Officer.

This application is, accordingly, disposed of. (Navaniti Prasad Singh, J.) Trivedi/- U