Nagina Khatoon v. The State Of Bihar Through The Secretary Anshuli Arya Department Of Public Health Engineering Depart

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.3316 of 2015 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 83 of 2015 ====================================================== Nagina Khatoon Wife of Late Afzal Hussain Resident of village + P.O.- Kakan, P.S. - Jokihat, District - Araria.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Secretary Anshuli Arya, Department of Public Health Engineering Department, Bihar, Patna.

2. The Secretary, Anshuli Arya, Department of Public Health Engineering Department, Bihar, Patna.

3. The Principal Secretary, Sudhir Kumar Rakesh, General Administration Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

4. The Principal Secretary, Ravi Mittal, Department of Finance, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

5. The Engineer-in-Chief-cum-Special Secretary, PHED, Bihar, Patna (Seat Vacant).

6. The Chief Engineer, Ragho Jee Ram, Department of PHED (Mechanical), Bihar, Patna.

7. The Superintending Engineer, Arvind Prakash Ranjan, Public Health Engineering Department, Purnea-Circle, District - Purnea.

8. The Executive Engineer, Sanjay Dubey, Public Health Division, Araria.

9. The District Magistrate, Himanshu Sharma, Araria.

10. The Accountant General (A & E), Sanjay Kumar, Bihar, Patna.

11. The District Accounts Officer, Bashuki Nath, District - Purnea.

12. The Treasury Officer, Rana S.K. Tuntun, Araria. .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Siyaram Pandey For the Respondent/s : Mr. Ga9 A.K. Sinha ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI and HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. NILU AGRAWAL ORAL ORDER

Patna High Court MJC No.3316 of 2015 (5) dt.26-03-2018 2/2 (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI) 26-03-2018 The contempt application is disposed off with a direction upon the competent authority that keeping in mind the pay revision recommendations in terms of 6th pay and 7th pay, let the family pension of the petitioner be suitably revised and authorization issued preferably within a period of three months from the date of production of a copy of this order. (Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J) (Nilu Agrawal, J) Devendra/Arjun U