Most. Meena Devi v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.12559 of 2015 =========================================================== Most. Meena Devi wife of Late Nand Kumar Singh, Resident of village- Rampur, P.S.- Suryagarha, District- Lakhisarai .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Rural Work Department, Patna

2. The Engineer-in-Chief, Rural Work Department, Patna

3. The Chief Engineer Rural Work Department, Patna

4. The Superintending Engineer, Rural Work Department, Work Division, Munger

5. The Executive Engineer, Rural Work Department, Work Division, Sheikhpura .... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ram Vinay Prasad Singh @Sanjay, Adv. For the Respondent/s : Mr. S.K.Mandal, SC-24 =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 17-09-2015 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Counsel for the State.

2. This writ petition has been filed seeking a direction to the respondents to refund the security deposit with regard to different schemes said to have been executed by the deceased husband of the petitioner.

3. It is submitted that the deceased husband of the petitioner was assigned different works under Rural Works Department, Works Division, Sheikhpura in terms of agreement entered into and such works even executed for which some payments had been made however further works could not be executed on account of his sudden demise. It is further

Patna High Court CWJC No.12559 of 2015 dt.17-09-2015 2/2 submitted that the security deposit in respect of such works is still lying with the respondents and in the ends of justice the same should be refunded to the petitioner. The petitioner further invites attention to letter No. 1790 dated 22.12.2014 and other correspondence (Annexure-5 series) in this regard.

4. In view of the nature of the grievance of the petitioner, this writ petition is disposed of with consent of the parties, granting liberty to the petitioner to approach the Respondent No. 5 with a fresh representation, who will examine the matter and take steps for payment of the security deposit to the extent admitted, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. If the outstanding amount is admitted but not paid to the petitioner within the said period, then she would be entitled for simple interest at the rate of 10% per annum to be calculated from the date it became due till the date of its final payment. It is further clarified that if any part of the claim of the petitioner is not found admitted, then she should be communicated the reasons for reaching such conclusion.

(Vikash Jain, J) Md. Ibrarul/- U