Baburam Sah v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No 1121 of 2015 =========================================================== Baburam Sah Son of Late Somari Sah, Resident of Village - Sant Ghat, Infront of G.M. College, Bettiah, District - West Champaran. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

2. The Collector, West Champaran at Bettiah.

3. Zila Parishad, West Champaran at Bettiah.

4. The Civil Surgon Cum Chief Medical Officer, Bettiah West Champaran.

5. The Prabhari Chkitsa Padadhikari, Prathmik Swasth Kendra, Thakraha, District West Champaran.

6. The Prabhari Chikitsa Padadhikari, Prathmik Swasth Kendra, Ram Nagar, District - West Champaran.

.... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr Surendra Kishore Thakur, Advocate For the S t a t e : Mr Utsav Kumar, AC to GA IV For Respondents 2 & 3 : Mr Bashishtha Narayan Mishra, Advocate =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 01-05-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, State as well as the Zila Parishad.

2 In view of the submissions made in paragraphs 4 and 5 of the counter affidavit by respondent No 4 (Civil Surgeon -cumChief Medical Officer, West Champaran at Bettiah), it appears that from July, 2012 to 25th November 2012, the salary of the petitioner has been paid through bank account by the authorities and order has been issued for payment of the salary for the period 26th November, 2012 to 11th October, 2013 under Memo No 2174 dated 09.12.2014

Patna High Court CWJC No.1121 of 2015 dt.01-05-2018 2/2 issued by respondent No 4.

3 Such payments take care of the relief prayed for in the instant writ petition.

4 Since the grievance of the petitioner has been redressed, no further direction needs to be issued on the instant writ petition.

5 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the amounts, as reflected in Annexure A with respect to the period July, 2012 to 25th November 2012, appear to be inadequate/insufficient. 6 No rejoinder has been filed disputing the credits made in the bank account of the petitioner. Therefore, this Court does not consider it appropriate to deal with the issue. However, if there is any discrepancy remaining in the amount paid, it will be open to the petitioner to agitate his claim before respondent No 4. 7 With these observations and directions, this writ petition is disposed of.

(Madhuresh Prasad, J) M.E.H./- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date 02.05.2018 Transmission Date NA