Patna High CourtCWJC/17574/2017disposed

Smt. Dropadi Pandey v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2018-04-02Mr. Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 17574 of 2017 =========================================================== Smt. Dropadi Pandey, Wife of Late Shyam Narain Pandey, Resident at MohallaSadargali Patna City, P.S. Khajkala District-Patna. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

2. The Accountant General (A&E) Bihar, Patna. B. Block Patna.

3. The Director Health Department, Bihar, Patna.

4. The Civil Surgeon Jehanabad District-Jehanabad.

5. The Treasury Officer, District-Patna.

6. The Incharge Medical Officer, Primary Health Centre, Okri (Modanganj) District-Jehanabad.

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Rabindra Prasad Singh, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Birju Prasad, G.P.13 (Respondents No. 1,3,4,5 and6) For the Accountant General :

Mr. L. P. K. Rajgrihar, Advocate =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 02-04-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner; State and Accountant General.

2. On 26.03.2018, learned counsel for the petitioner had taken time to seek instructions with regard to the averments made in the supplementary counter affidavit filed on behalf of respondents no. 4 and 6, in which it had been stated that an amount of Rs. 2,28,476/- had wrongly been credited into the account of the petitioner on 08.04.2015 and on the same day, the petitioner had withdrawn Rs. 1,67,000/-, which was not disclosed by the petitioner.

Patna High Court CWJC No.17574 of 2017 dt.02-04-2018 2/2 Copy of the same was served on learned counsel for the petitioner on 19.03.2018. Thereafter, on 26.03.2018, second supplementary counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondents no. 4 and 6 in which Letter No. 200 dated 15.03.2018, had been brought on record written by the respondent no. 6 to the respondent no. 5 by which the account of the petitioner which was kept on hold was made operational and also directing that Rs. 11,000/- per month be credited into her account as pension after adjusting Rs. 5,000/- per month, till the excess amount credited into her account was adjusted.

3. There is no reply to the same by the petitioner.

4. In view thereof, the writ petition stands disposed off with a direction to the respondent no. 5 to ensure that the monthly pension of the petitioner is restored, if not already done, in terms of the order of the respondent no. 6, contained in the aforesaid Memo No. 200 dated 15.03.2018, addressed to him, within a week of copy of this order being produced before him.

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