Shaiqua Tobassum And ORS v. The State Of Bihar And ORS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.3466 of 2017 ======================================================
1. Shaiqua Tobassum, D/o. Zainnuddin Ansari, resident of Village- P.O.- Khiri Yawan District- Aurangabad.
2. Fouzia Sultana, D/o. Taufiana Ahmad, resident of Village & P.O. Khiriyawan, District- Aurangabad.
3. Tarnnum Parveen, W/o Shamsher Alam, resident of VillageDashwatkhap, P.O. Madanpur, District- Aurangabad.
4. Md. Fauzan Ahmad, S/o Md. Shamim Akhtar, resident of Village & P.O. Khiriyawan, District- Aurangabad.
5. Nasrin Jahan, D/o Md. Kashim, resident of VillageKhiriyawan, P.O.- Khiriyawan, District- Aurangabad. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar.
2. The District Magistrate Aurangabad.
3. The District Education Officer, Aurangabad.
4. The District Programme Officer, Establishment Aurangabad.
5. The Block Education Officer, Madanpur, District- Aurangabad. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Shailesh Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Respondent/s :
Mr. P.R. Sing AC to AAG15 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPADHYAY ORAL ORDER 15-02-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State.
Vide order dated 5.12.2017 the respondents were directed to file counter affidavit within six weeks but neither the counter affidavit has been filed nor grievance of the petitioners have been redressed. The respondents have not shown the minimum curtsy to the Court by filing a petition for extension of time for filing the counter affidavit.
In the aforesaid circumstances, the Court is constrained to
Patna High Court CWJC No.3466 of 2017(3) dt.15-02-2018 2/2 dispose of the writ petition with a direction to the respondentDistrict Programme Officer, Establishment to examine the case of the petitioners and if it is found that the petitioners are entitled to payment of honorarium for the period they have worked, the respondent shall pass appropriate order to ensure payment of the unpaid honorarium after due verification of the record available with the respondents.
It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merit of the claim of the petitioners. The respondents are required to ensure on verification of the record whether the petitioners have worked for the period they are claiming honorarium. Final decision may be taken in this regard within a maximum period of sixty 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) spandey/- U