Navin Kumar And ANR. v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.11969 of 2008 ======================================================

1. Navin Kumar , S/o Late Ram Badan Singh and Late Kusum Devi, resident of village Bakhtiyarpur Ward No. 04 P.O. + P.S. Bakhtiyarpur District Patna

2. Madhuri Devi , D/o Late Ram Badan Singh and Late Kusum Devi, Resident of village Bakhtiyarpur Ward no. 05, P.O. + P.S. Bakhtiyarpur District Patna .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Commissioner - cum - Secretary , Water Resource Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna

2. The Commissioner - cum- Secretary, Water Resource Dept. Government of Bihar, Patna

3. The Joint Secretary, Water Resources Deptt., Govt. of Bihar, Patna

4. The Under Secretary, Water Resources Deptt. Govt. of Bihar, Patna

5. The Engineer - in - Chief cum Special Secretary Water Resources Department Govt. of Bihar, Patna

6. The Chief Engineer, Water Resources Deptt. Govt. of Biahr, Patna

7. The Superintending Engineer, Flood Control Circle Water Resources Department, Sone Bhawan, Patna

8. The Executive Engineer, Flood Control Design Division No. 1 , Patna .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Madan Pd.Singh 2 For the Respondent/s : AC to SC No. 23 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 24-03-2017 At the very outset , learned AC to SC No. 23 in presence of Sri Madan Prasad Singh No. 2, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that grievance of the petitioners has already been redressed however by way of referring to the statement made in paragraph no. 14 (iii) to the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondent nos. 6 to 8 on 9th March 2017 , Sri Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that it is true that in the counter affidavit it has been accepted that since the order of

Patna High Court CWJC No.11969 of 2008 (6) dt.24-03-2017 2/2 suspension was quashed by this court only it has been indicated that salary for the suspension period will be paid. According to learned counsel for the petitioners payment has not been made till date.

In view of the statement made in the counter affidavit as well as the facts disclosed in Annexure - 'I' to the counter affidavit dated 9th March 2017 the court proposes to dispose of the writ petition with direction to the respondents to make payment of salary for the suspension period as indicated in paragraph no. 14 (iii) of the counter affidavit and all other admissible dues to the petitioners preferably within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt / production of a copy of this order.

With above observation and direction, the writ petition stands disposed of.

(Rakesh Kumar, J) Praful/- U