Savitri Verma v. The State Of Bihar And ANR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 18269 of 2016 =========================================================== Savitri Verma W/o Late Umeshwar Prasad Verma, Resident of Ward No. 11, Savitri Sadan, Kailashpuri, Dumara, District- Sitamarhi. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Managing Director, Bihar State Warehousing Corporation, B-2, 1st Floor, Mauryalok, Patna-1.

2. The Managing Director, Bihar State Ware Housing Corporation, B-2, 1st Floor, Mauryalok, Patna-1.

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.

For the B.S.W.H.C.

:

Mr. Mithilesh Kuamr Rai, Advocate =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 02-08-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the Bihar State Warehousing Corporation (hereinafter referred to as the 'Corporation').

2. The petitioner has moved the Court for the following reliefs:

"i) For issuance of appropriate writ/order/direction to the Respondents to give full details of retiral benefit and make payment of all the retirement benefit including Pension along with interest of her deceased husband, which has been stopped by the aforesaid Authority without any legal basis;

ii) For giving a direction to the Respondents that holding or retaining the retiral dues, against the incomplete departmental proceedings during pendency whereof, the employee died is wrong, bad and contrary to the established rule of law and as such the amount be released in favour of the petitioner, being the heir of the deceased employee;

Patna High Court CWJC No.18269 of 2016 dt.02-08-2018 2/2 iii) For any other relief(s) to which the petitioner may be found entitled to in the facts and circumstances of the present case."

3. After some arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that he may be permitted to withdraw the writ application to assail the order passed against the husband of the petitioner in the departmental proceeding which has not been done in the present case and due to which the benefits are held up.

4. Learned counsel for the respondents does not object.

5. In view thereof, the writ petition stands disposed off with liberty aforesaid.

(Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J.) P. Kumar AFR/NAFR U