Anju Devi v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Letters Patent Appeal No.1650 of 2013 IN Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 2697 of 2011 =========================================================== Anju Devi W/O Sanosh Kumar Singh Resident of Village- Trilochanpur ( Bharkara), P.S- Rajpur, District- Buxar, Presently Prakhand Teacher of Upgraded Middle School, Raghunathpur, Police Station- Rajpur, District- Buxar. .... .... Appellant/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through Principal Secretary, Human Resources Department, Government of Bihar.

2. The Director, Primary and Adult Education, Govt. of Bihar, Patna

3. The District Magistrate, Buxar.

4. The Member, District Teacher Employment Appellate Tribunal, District- Buxar.

5. The District Superintendent of Education, Buxar.

6. The Block Development Officer, Rajpur, District- Buxar.

7. The Block Education Extension Officer, Bhojpur, District- Buxar.

8. The Mukhiya, Gram Panchayat Raj, Barupur, P.S- Rajpur, District-Buxar

9. The Panchayat Sachiv, Gram Panchayat Ra, Barupur, P.S- Rajpur, DistrictBuxar.

10. The Head Master, Upgraded Middle School Raghunathpur, P.S- Rajpur, District- Buxar.

11. Poonam Kumari W/O Sunil Kumar Resident Of Village Baluhar, P.O- Hethua, Rajpur, P.S- Rajpur, District- Buxar.

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

For the Appellant/s : Mr. Neeraj Kumar Alias Sanidh, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Dhurjati Kr Prasad, Advocate =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI and HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. NILU AGRAWAL ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI) Date: 08-03-2017 Heard learned counsel for the appellant and the counsel for the State.

The delay of 6 days is condoned. I.A. No. 9033 of 2013 is allowed. The appeal thereafter is heard on merits.

Patna High Court LPA No.1650 of 2013 dt.08-03-2017 2/2 After having heard the counsel for the appellant and the State, the appeal is disposed of with observation that there is obligation upon the respondent-authorities to take a decision on the claim of the appellant with regard to payment of salary. If such a decision has not been taken already, even now it can be taken because direction of the Tribunal and the learned Single Judge was to verify the period of actual work done by the appellant or by the private Respondent no.11 and communicate the outcome thereof. If it has not been done, it should be done even now. The appeal is disposed of with the above observation. (Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J.) (Nilu Agrawal, J.) Arjun/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date 09.03.2017 Transmission Date NA