IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.8452 of 2009 ====================================================== Shiv Pyari Devi .... .... Petitioner/s Versus The State Of Bihar & Ors .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shashi Shekhar Tiwary For the Respondent/s : Mr. (Sc21) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. MRIDULA MISHRA ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. MRIDULA MISHRA) 7 14-10-2011 Heard counsel for the petitioner and the State. Petitioner is the widow of late Yogendra Singh who retired as Clerk on 30.9.2003 from the Primary Health Center Siswan, Siwan. Petitioner’s grievance is that arrears of salary payable to her late husband for the period of suspension was not paid to him, despite the fact that he has retired on 30.9.2003 and died on 21.2.2006. It has also been stated in the writ application that Rs. 15000/- was again deducted from Provident fund amount paid to the petitioner, though it has already been payable to her late husband though it had already been recovered from his salary. Other grievance of the petitioner is that period in between November, 1978 to March, 1979, petitioner’s husband was in custody in connection with criminal case, as such he was not under suspension. Salary for the period of suspension has also Patna High Court CWJC No.8452 of 2009 (7) dt.14-10-2011 2 / 3 2 not been paid. In the first counter affidavit filed on behalf of the State, it was stated that Rs. 15,000/- illegally deducted from GPF amount has been paid to the petitioner. A bill has already been prepared for making payment of arrears of salary, for the period of suspension. Bill amounting to Rs. 5,04,149.00 has already been sent before the Treasury Officer, Siwan for passing the bill and said amount will be paid to the petitioner. Regarding arrears of salary for the period in custody, in the First counter affidavit, it was stated that legal opinion is being sought for making payment of salary for this period. Counsel for the State was asked to file supplementary counter affidavit, making specific statement regarding payment of arrears of salary to the petitioner for the period, during which petitioner’s husband was in custody. In response to that supplementary counter affidavit has been filed. In para 4 of the supplementary counter affidavit, it has been stated that salary for the period of judicial custody is also included in Bill No. 21/11-12 amounting to Rs. 5,04149/-, but erroneously in the earlier counter affidavit it had been stated that it has not been paid and legal opinion is being taken, regarding entitlement of petitioner’s husband for recovering salary for the period. Entire amount, relating to arrears of salary for the period of Patna High Court CWJC No.8452 of 2009 (7) dt.14-10-2011 3 / 3 3 suspension and the period during which petitioner’s husband was in custody, as per the last affidavit, has already been paid to the petitioner. In support of this statement, calculation chart has been annexed. Considering the fact that the entire amount has been paid to the petitioner, this application is disposed off. In case petitioner has any doubt, that still some amount has remained unpaid, she has liberty to file her representation before the concerned authority, for such claim. Such representation filed by the petitioner shall be considered and disposed off, without any delay. Arun Kumar/- (Mridula Mishra, J)