Dr. Kiran Saksena v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.14875 of 2012 ====================================================== Dr. Kiran Saksena, Daughter of Late Swami Dayal Saksena, Presently Resident of 2/105, Viswash Khand, Gomti Nagar, P.S. and District- Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through the Commissioner-Cum-Secretary, Department of Higher Education, Government of Bihar, Patna. 2.

The Vice Chancellor, Tilkamanjhi Bhagalpur University, Bhagalpur. 3.

The Registrar, Tilkamanjhi Bhagalpur University, Bhagalpur. 4.

The Finance Officer, Tilkamanjhi Bhagalpur University, Bhagalpur. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.

For the State :

Mr. Alok Ranjan, AC to AAG 5 For the T.M.B.U.

:

Mr. Subodh Kumar Jha, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL ORDER 09-11-2022 Nobody appears on behalf of the petitioner.

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

"That, this is an application for issuance of writ or writs, order or orders, direction or directions in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing the respondents to fix the pension appropriately and to pay all pensionary dues like, Arrear of Pension, Gratuity, Arrear Salary, Leave Encashment, Group Insurance, Welfare Amount and Undeposited Provident Fund Amount etc.

alongwith reasonable compound interest as well as calculation chart."

3. On 02.11.2022 also nobody had appeared on behalf

Patna High Court CWJC No.14875 of 2012(24) dt.09-11-2022 2/2 of the petitioner and the Court had noted that supplementary counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondents no. 2 to 4 enclosing order of the Vice Chancellor of the respondentUniversity indicating that all admitted dues were paid and no rejoinder to the same has been filed.

4. In the aforesaid background, when learned counsel for the petitioner has again not appeared and no rejoinder controverting the stand taken on behalf of the respondentUniversity being on record, the Court can presume that the cause of action does not survive.

5. In view thereof, the writ petition stands disposed of. (Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J) Anand Kr.

U