Archna Kuamri v. The State Of Bihar And ORS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.9340 of 2017 ====================================================== Archna Kuamri, W/o Nagendra Mishra, Resident of Village- Babu Ke Bhatkan, PO- Narendrapur, P.S.- Andar, District- Siwan. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar.
2. The District Program Officer (Establishment) Siwan.
3. The District Education Officer, Siwan.
4. The Block Development Officer, Darauli, District- Siwan.
5. The Block Education Officer, Darauli, District- Siwan. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Vijay Kumar Mishra, Advocate For the Respondent/s :
Mr. Ashutosh Ranjan Pandey- AAG15 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPADHYAY ORAL ORDER 21-12-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State.
The present writ application has been filed by the petitioner for a direction to the respondents to make payment of salary.
Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was validly appointed and is regularly working but the respondents are not making payment of salary since July, 2015 although the respondents have paid salary from 3.5.2011 to June, 2015. Without going into the legality or validity of the claim of the petitioner for payment of salary, the writ application is disposed of with the direction to the District Education Officer, Siwan to look into the grievance of the petitioner and dispose of
Patna High Court CWJC No.9340 of 2017(2) dt.21-12-2017 2/2 the representation as contained in Annexure-3 by a reasoned and speaking order within a maximum period of three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. It is needless to state here that if the petitioner is validly appointed and regularly working then the respondents are under obligation to ensure payment of salary - arrears as well as current. The decision in this regard must be taken by the respondents within three months, as indicated hereinabove. With the aforesaid the writ petition is disposed of. (Anil Kumar Upadhyay, J) spandey/- U