Dr. Sheo Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.393 of 2024 ====================================================== Dr. Sheo Kumar S/o Late Bhagirath Majhi, Resident of village-Kasadeura Bagar, Post- Kasadeura Bagar, Police Station- Maharajganj, District-Siwan, Bihar.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through Additional Chief Secretary, Department of Health, Government of Bihar, Patna.

2.

The Additional Chief Secretary, Department of Health, Government of Bihar, Patna.

3.

The Secretary, Department of Health, Government of Bihar, Patna. 4.

The Joint Secretary, Department of Health, Government of Bihar, Patna. 5.

The Accountant General, Bihar, Patna.

6.

The District Magistrate, West Champaran (Bettiah), Bihar. 7.

The Civil Surgeon-Cum-Chief Medical Officer, West Champaran (Bettiah), Bihar.

8.

The Deputy Superintendent, Sub-Divisional Hospital, Narkatiaganj, West Champaran (Bettiah), Bihar.

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Rajeev Kumar, Adv.

For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Gyan Prakash Ojha, GA 7 For the A.G.

:

Mr. Nirvikar, Sr. Adv.

Ms. Nivedita, Adv.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 15-07-2024 Heard Mr. Shankar Kumar Thakur, learned advocate for the petitioner and learned Government Advocate No. 7 for the State.

2. The grievance of the petitioner is only confined to the payment of leave encashment as well as revised increments. Learned advocate for the petitioner contended that on the representation of this petitioner, the respondent No. 8 vide

Patna High Court CWJC No.393 of 2024(2) dt.15-07-2024 2/2 annexure-2 informed to the Civil Surgeon-cum-Chief Medical Officer, West Champaran (Bettiah) that for payment of leave encashment and arrears on account of enhanced pay, the data in required performa has already been sent to the respondent No. 4 for on boarding it under HRMS but till date it could not be done.

3. Despite the submission of the necessary data by the respondent No. 8, the petitioner has not been accorded his admissible dues and he has compelled to come to this court by filing this writ petition.

4. Learned counsel for the State fairly submitted that the payment of the admissible dues of the petitioner is under process and it is likely to be paid earliest.

5. Considering the submissions at the Bar the present writ petition stands disposed of with a direction to the Respondent Nos. 4 and 7 to ensure payment of the admissible amount as prayed for in the writ petition preferably within a period of four weeks from the date of production of copy of this order.

6. The writ petition stands disposed off.

(Harish Kumar, J) annpurna/- U