← Library
Patna High CourtMJC/1579/2019disposed

Sabita Devi v. The State Of Bihar

2026-02-10Mr. Justice Ajit Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.1579 of 2019 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2562 of 2018 ====================================================== Sabita Devi Wife of Sri Ram Prasad Ram Resident of Bhouara Ambedkar Nagar, Ward No. 26, P.O. and P.S. District- Madhubani. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar Through Sri Chaitanya Prasad, Son of not Known, Presently the Principal Secretary, Urban Development and Housing Department, Government of Bihar, New Secretariat, Patna. 2.

The Ashutosh Ranjan Choudhary Son of Not known, the Executive Officer, Nagar Parishad Madhubani, District- Madhubani. ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Ashutosh Kumar Jha For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Subhash Prasad Singh (Ga3) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT KUMAR ORAL ORDER 10-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. Learned counsel for the Nagar Parishad, Madhubani, by referring to paragraphs 3 and 4 of the supplementary counter affidavit filed on behalf of O.P. No. 2, submits that, in terms of the order passed by this Court in CWJC No. 2562 of 2018, the arrears of pension pursuant to the 5th and 6th Pay Revisions have already been paid and that nothing survives for adjudication. The relevant paragraphs of the supplementary counter affidavit filed on behalf of O.P. No. 2 are extracted hereinbelow: "...3. That all the dues related to provident fund, gratuity, leave encashment, arrear due to fifth pay revision commission and arrear dues due to the sixth pay revision commission had already been paid to the

Patna High Court MJC No.1579 of 2019(7) dt.10-02-2026 2/2 petitioner on different dates.

4. That this way opposite party has paid all the outstanding dues and arrears due to the petitioner."

3. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner is not in a position to controvert the aforesaid submission.

4. In view of the aforesaid, this application stands disposed of.

(Ajit Kumar, J) shikha/- U