Shabnam Perveen v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.15983 of 2016 ======================================================

1. Shabnam Perveen Daughter of Abdul Quiyum Hawari, Wife of Md. Mansoor Aalam Resident of Village-Mahamadpur, P.O.Bhorahan,P.S. Panapur, District Saran at Chapra .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Bihar, through the Principal Secretary, Department of Education, Government of Bihar, Patna

2. The Director, Primary Education, Department of Education, Government of Bihar, Patna.

3. The Collector cum District Magistrate, Saran at Chapra

4. The District Education Officer, Saran at Chapra

5. The District Programme Officer (Establishment), Saran at Chapra

6. The Block Education Officer, Panapur, District Saran at Chapra

7. The Head Master, Up-graded Middle School, Mahammadpur, P.S. Panapur, Anchal Panapur, District-Saran at Chapra .... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner : Mr. Jeetendra Narayan, Adv. For the Respondents : Mr. Jitendra Kr. Roy No. 1- Sc13 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPADHYAY ORAL ORDER 06-02-2018 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing for the State.

Despite two advance copies of the writ application served in the office of the Advocate General on 16.09.2016 for facilitating to file the counter affidavit, no counter affidavit has been filed. This is the very sorry state of affairs in the management of the litigation in the State of Bihar.

The grievance of the petitioner in the present writ application is stoppage of salary from January, 2016. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is regularly working and till the date there is no adverse order.

Patna High Court CWJC No.15983 of 2016 (2) dt.06-02-2018 2/3 Under the aforesaid circumstances, non-payment of salary after taking works, amounts to begari, which is prohibited under the constitutional scheme contained in Article 23 of the Constitution of India.

In the absence of counter affidavit, the Court is unable to decide the factual controversy involved in the present writ application, the reluctance of the respondents in not filing the counter affidavit renders the Court in a helpless position and, as such, this writ application is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to take final decision with regard to claim of the petitioner that at the time when the petitioner was appointed, the degree in question was valid in view of the circular of the State Government and decision of the Division Bench. The respondentDistrict Programme Officer (Establishment), Saran at Chapra, is required to take final decision in the matter of petitioner for payment of salary as respondent cannot be allowed to take work and deny payment.

The petitioner is also granted liberty to bring to the notice of the District Programme Officer (Establishment), Saran at Chapra, all the relevant documents on which the petitioner places reliance in support of his case.

Patna High Court CWJC No.15983 of 2016 (2) dt.06-02-2018 3/3 (Establishment), Saran at Chapra, is required to take final decision and ensure payment of salary for the period the petitioner has worked and there is no restraint order on working of the petitioner. Such an exercise must be completed within a maximum period of sixty days, from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.

(Anil Kumar Upadhyay, J) SA/- U