Veena Singh v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.8419 of 2014 ====================================================== Veena Singh W/o Late Sita Ram Singh R/O - AT + P.O. - Kutaut, P.S. Barbigha, District - Sheikhpura .... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. The Principal Secretary, Agriculture Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna

3. The Principal Secretary, Finance Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna

4. The Accountant General, Bihar, Patna

5. The Treasury Officer, Sheikhpura

6. The District Provindent Fund Officer, Nawada .... .... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner : Mr. Rajeev Kumar Singh and Mr. P.M. Sharan, Advocates For the State : Mr. Kinkar Kumar, SC 27 For the AG, Bihar:

Mr. Ram Yash Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE RAVI RANJAN ORAL ORDER 30-01-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. Petitioner claims that her husband was promoted as Block Development Officer in the year 1997, however, a counter affidavit has been filed and a letter appears to have been written by the Joint Director (Administration) -cum- Director (Administration) -cum- Additional Secretary of the Directorate of Agriculture that the husband of the petitioner was non-gazetted officer but, the claim of the petitioner regarding revision of pay scale etc. has not been denied in the counter affidavit. In such a situation, since nothing has been brought on record by learned counsel for the State except a letter contained in

Patna High Court CWJC No.8419 of 2014 (2) dt.30-01-2016 Annexure A regarding this matter, this writ application is being disposed of with a direction to the Principal Secretary, Agriculture Department, Government of Bihar, Patna(respondent no. 2) to look into the matter of the petitioner and examine as to whether the husband of the petitioner was promoted to the post of Block Development Officer or not and while doing so, he would be obliged to look at the entries made in Annexures 2 and 3 by the office of the Accountant General (A & E), Bihar, Patna, in which it has been clearly stated that the petitioner was Block Development Officer.

Since the petitioner is the widow of the deceased employee, if found entitled for the reliefs for which she is claiming, immediate step would be required to be taken for sanction of the due amount.

It is expected that the entire exercise would be completed within a period of three months from the date of receipt /production of a copy of this order.

(Dr. Ravi Ranjan, J) SC/- U