Draupati Devi v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.719 of 2015 ====================================================== Draupati Devi, Wife of Late Jai Narayan Pathak, Resident of Adalat Ganj (Ram Janki Thakurbari) P.S. - Kotwali, Post - GPO Patna, District - Patna. .... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Health Commissioner-cum - Secretary to the Govt. of Bihar, Health Department, New Secretariat (Vikash Bhawan), Patna.

2. The Health Commissioner-cum-Secretary to the Govt. of Bihar, Health Department, New Secretariat (Vikash Bhawan), Patna.

3. The Director of Desi Chikitsa, Directorate of Indigenous System of Medicine, Bihar, New Secretariat (Vikash Bhawan), Patna.

4. The Principal, Rajkiya Ayurvedic College, Kadamkuan, Patna.

5. The Accountant General, Bihar, Patna.

.... .... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shailendra Kumar Verma For the Respondent/s : Mr.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 25-01-2017 Heard Sri Shailendra Kumar Verma, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned State Counsel as well as Mr. S.M.Ehtesham, learned counsel for the Respondent/ Accountant General.

The petitioner is widow of an employee, who retired on 30.06.2009 and subsequently died on 06.04.2012, has approached this Court with a prayer to direct the Respondents for making payment of arrear of salary and allowance with all consequential benefits for the period in between 21.12.1989 to 31.12.1996.

Patna High Court CWJC No.719 of 2015 (2) dt.25-01-2017 2/2 Learned counsel for the petitioner tried to persuade the Court that the husband of the petitioner had repeatedly represented. On his representation, number of communications were made by the Principal of the concerned college to the Director, Desi Chikitsa. Even the documents, on which reliance has been placed, was lastly issued on 25.04.2005 vide Annexure-3 series. It is evident that the claim of arrear of salary from 21.12.1989 to 31.12.1996 and allowance has been made in the present writ petition by the widow of the employee, not by the employee, who had already retired in the year, 2009. In view of the fact that the present writ petition has been filed at much belated stage and also by the widow of an employee, there is no reason to entertain the present writ petition. The writ petition stands dismissed.

(Rakesh Kumar, J) NKS/- U