Veena Devi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.15800 of 2019 ====================================================== Veena Devi, Wife of Shri Shrawan Kumar Rajak, Resident of Village- Mau Dhaneshpur North, Police Station- Vidyapati Nagar, District- Samastipur. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

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

2.

The Director Mass Education-cum- Additional Secondary Education Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

3.

The District Magistrate, Samastipur.

4.

The District Education Officer, Samastipur.

5.

The District Programme Officer (Secondary Education/Literacy), Samastipur.

6.

The District Programme Officer (Elementary Education and Sarva Siksha Abhiyan), Bihar Education Project, Samastipur. 7.

The Block Education Officer, Vidyapati Nagar, District- Samastipur. 8.

The Headmaster, Up-graded Middle School, North of Bandh Mau Dhaneshpur North, Block- Vidyapati Nagar, District- Samastipur. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ajay Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Rajeev Ranjan, AC to GP-20 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPADHYAY ORAL ORDER 06-08-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the respondents.

The grievance of the petitioner in the present writ petition is non-payment of remuneration.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has regularly worked as Shiksha Sevak but she has not been paid remuneration from September, 2017 till date. The issue of payment of remuneration requires

Patna High Court CWJC No.15800 of 2019(2) dt.06-08-2019 2/2 verification of the record and as such the writ petition is of with a direction to the respondent-District Programme Officer (Literacy) to verify the records to ascertain whether the petitioner has worked as Shiksha Sevak or not for the period she is claiming salary.

In case, if it is found that the petitioner has worked for the period she is claiming remuneration, the respondents shall ensure payment of salary for the period the petitioner has actually worked.

Necessary decision in this regard must be taken by the respondents at the earliest preferably within a maximum period of 60 days from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.

With the aforesaid, the writ petition stands disposed of. (Anil Kumar Upadhyay, J) uday/- U