IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.11482 of 2010 1. Yogendra Paswan S/O Late Hari Nandan Paswan R/O Vill.- Mor Paschim, P.S. Maokama, Distt.- Patna (Ex- Panchayat Sevak Lemuabad Gram Panchayat Under Pandarak Block Of Patna District) Versus 1. The State Of Bihar, Through The Secretary Rural Development Department, Govt. Of Bihar, Patna 2. The District Magistrate, Patna 3. The Deputy Development Commissioner, Patna 4. The Block Development Officer, Pandarak, Distt.- Patna 5. The Gram Panchayat Lemuabad, Through Its Mukhiya R/O Vill.- Lemuabad, P.S.- Pandarak, Distt.- Patna ---------------------------------- 3. 18.11.2011 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and the State. The claim in the writ application is for payment of dues for works executed by the petitioner under the Sampurna Gramin Rojgar Yojana in Gram Panchayat Lemuabad, Block Pandarak in the District of Patna, for an amount of Rs. 5,36,827/-. The counter affidavit affirmed by the Block Development Officer at para 9 and 10 reads as follows:- “9. That the petitioner has done work allotted to him but due to non availability of fund his dues have been not paid by the respondent and as and when the fund will be made available the same shall be paid to him in accordance with law. 10. That as a matter of fact, due of petitioner will be paid by Mukhiya of Panchayat and answering respondent has no role in payment of money to the petitioner, under the scheme, the work was done by the petitioner, it is DDC, from where money will come and the same will be paid through Mukhiya to petitioner, but as per information money is not available in the fund and when ever fund will come then petitioner will be given his due.” If the facts are not in dispute all that remains to be done is for payment of the dues. In the nature of the counter affidavit filed the Court is at loss to understand why it was allowed to assume the nature of a litigation. The counter affidavit states that it was the Deputy Development Commissioner who was required to ensure that the Mukhiya makes the payment. Let the petitioner appear before the respondent no. 3, the Deputy Development Commissioner, Patna who shall ensure that the dues of the petitioner as claimed are paid to him within a maximum period of one month from the date of receipt and/or production of a copy of this order. The Court makes this observation in the background of the facts that though the counter affidavit has been filed the quantum and execution of the work has not been disputed. Learned Counsel for the petitioner next submits that the petitioner had to make payments for securing materials for execution of the works by raising money through loan etc for which he had to pay interest. He is entitled to be suitably compensated. The Deputy Development Commissioner is necessarily required to decide this aspect on a claim being raised by the petitioner. The Commissioner shall decide this claim by a reasoned order. Any liability to incur interest if any cannot be saddled upon the State Government and has necessarily to be recovered from the salary of the concerned erring government servant, though the government may discharge the liability initially. The writ application stands disposed. Snkumar/- (Navin Sinha,J.)