Meena Devi v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.9342 of 2013 ===========================================================

1. Meena Devi Wife Of Late Hulus Paswan Resident Of Village - Daudpur, P.O. Rapasbaj, P.S. Bachwara, District - Begusarai ( Bihar ) .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State Of Bihar Through The Principal Secretary, Water Resources Department, Government Of Bihar, Patna

2. The Deputy Secretary, Water Resources Department, Government Of Bihar, Patna ( Bihar ) Null Null

3. The Engineer - In - Chief, Water Resources Department, Government Of Bihar, Patna ( Bihar )

4. The Chief Engineer ( Mechanical ), Water Resources Department, Government Of Bihar, Patna ( Bihar )

5. The Superintending Engineer, Mithapur Circle, Water Resources Department, Government Of Bihar, Patna ( Bihar )

6. The Executive Engineer ( Mechanical ), Field Machjnery Division, Digha, Water Resources Department, Government Of Bihar, Patna ( Bihar )

7. The Accountant General, Mahalekhakar Bhawan, Bir Chand Patel Path, Patna ( Bihar )

8. The District Provident Fund Officer, Patna ( Bihar ) .... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Manoj Kumar For the Respondent/s : Mr. Sita Ram Yadav, G.P.-16. For the Accountant General : Mr. Raghwanand =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 25-08-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and counsel appearing on behalf of the State.

Petitioner has prayed for grant of pensionary benefits in the light of demise of her husband. The respondents have filed the counter affidavit in this case after serving a copy of the same on counsel for the petitioner on 12.2.2018.

Patna High Court CWJC No.9342 of 2013 dt.25-08-2018 2/2 Specific stand has been taken in the counter affidavit that the husband of the petitioner, late Hulas Paswan died while he was working in work charge establishment.

As per the Rule, family pension is not admissible to employees of the work charge establishment. Regarding the others claims, like GPF and LIC of the petitioner, specific statement has been made in an earlier counter affidavit which is also on record that dues have been paid. Statements made in the counter affidavit have not been denied or disputed by filing any reply or rejoinder. Thus, this writ petition is devoid of merit and dismissed. (Madhuresh Prasad, J) Sanjeev/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date27/08/2018 Transmission Date NA