IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.10729 of 2005 MALTI DEVI wife of late Mahabir Prasad, resident of New Bengali Colony,Barka Gaon Road, Hazaribagh, P.S. & District-Hazaribagh(Jharkhand State). Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR through the Secretary,Road Construction Department,Govt. of Biahr,Patna. 2.The Secretary,Road Construction Department, Govt. of Bihar,Patna. 3. The Secretary,Rural Development Department,Govt. of Bihar,Patna. 4.The Engineer-in-Chief,Rural eEngineering Organisation,Rural Development Department,Bihar,Patna. 5. The State of Jharkhand through the Chief Secretary,Govt. of Jharkhand,Randhi. 6. The District Provident Fund Officer,Hazaribagh. 7. The Accountant General,Bihar,Patna. 8. The Accountant General (A &E)II,Bihar,Patna. ----------- For the Petitioner : Mr. Rajendra Singh Shastri For the State : G.P.V 6 10.12.2008 The anarchy and the madness prevailing in the Secretariat of Bihar is writ large from the facts of this case where even a dead employee’s widow is not spared. Petitioner’s late husband retired 14 years back and died subsequently in 2004, still his salary and pensionary benefits were not settled. The Babus sitting in the Secretariat require the helpless wife to run from pillar to post begging for her husband’s lawful due. No one in the Bihar Secretariat found it to be a fit case for sympathetic consideration . Her fight did not evoke sympathy in any of the Babus dealing with the matter at any level. Ultimately she came to this Court for the salary and pensionary benefits of her late husband, who , as noted above, had superannuated 14 years back. State demanded that she should furnish various papers which obviously she was ignorant about . It was then said that even after superannuation ,petitioner’s late husband did not pursue claiming his pensionary benefit with earnest and it is because of those reasons there was delay. This Court would like to make it 2 clear that salary, gratuity, pension or any pensionary benefit is not a bounty , which is to be given at the will of the master. Gone are those days. It is a right of every employee, in consideration of services rendered by him, to receive without demand ,as a matter of right and not as a matter of pleasure. The misconception that some one must claim his salary or claim his retirement benefit and only then he would be given that is misnomer and misconceived. Permanent employee performs service contract and the constitutioanl obligation co terminus with the service rendered is for payment of salary or on his superannuation the retirement benefit. It is not to be demanded. It is to be paid even without a demand . It would indeed be shameful , if not unlawful , that these are benefits, must be demanded. These are rights which have to be given as a matter of course without demanding . From time to time this writ petition was adjourned on one pretext or the other for settlement of the due and its quantification. Ultimately in spite of undertaking given to this Court to settle the matter within one month when nothing was done and further time was prayed for, this Court lost its patience and ordered on 25.11.2008 for settlement and payment of all dues within fifteen days along with interest of 12% per annum from the date when the amounts were due, failing which the Secretary of the Department was directed to be present in Court to face charges of contempt for failure to abide by the undertaking given. This got magical result. In less than fifteen days all the dues i.e. salary arrear and arrear of retiral due were all quantified, interest calculated, Bank draft prepared and a counter affidavit giving the details filed. This only shows that there was no difficulty or problem in making the payment. The difficulty only was the lack of incentive and persuation which was ultimately supplied by the Court and which could not be supplied by the petitioner outside the Court.The thing which could not be done for last 14 years was done in less than 14 days 3 when this Court intervened. This is a matter, which requires serious consideration at governmental level because several thousand writ applications are pending in this Court and taking several hundred Judges’ hours in relation to retiral dues matter alone and most of which are then settled when the matter is taken up by the Court.The necessity of people in their falling years of life have become helpless so as to come to this Court for their rightful claim and why the Bihar Secretariat becomes so insensitive to these issues, are matters to be considered seriously at appropriate governmental level. Another matter to be considered by the State would be surely that it was some officers/officials in the Government Secretariat, who failed to act in time and could delay the matter for reasons which this Court cannot notice and delayed the matter inviting interest as compensation to be paid to the petitioner. The delayed payment interest itself runs into several lakhs. The Court cannot shut its eyes tp the fact that ultimately this amount is to be borne by the tax payers for no fault of the tax payers but because of fault of some one in the Secretariat dealing with the file of the petitioner’s husband. Why should citizen/ tax payers suffer ? In my view, citizen /tax payers cannot suffer, for ,it would be the duty of the State to enquire into the matter and fix the liability of individual in the office dealing with the pensionary matters who would be responsible for the delay in processing the claim and realize the entire amount of interest from the said person but this would not delay payment to the petitioner in any manner. All payments and pension order having been issued, all delayed payment interest having been pade by Bank Draft in favour of the petitioner, as detailed in para 14 of the second supplementary counter affidavit today, this writ petition stands disposed of. One of the stands on behalf of the State was that the service 4 book now lay with the State of Jharkhand and was not being sent by them.This is what caused the delay.This submission is only noted to be rejected as there cannot be a greater fallacious argument. Petitioner retired 14 years back when State of Jharkhand was not even in contemplation. He retired in 1994 and what happened in the next six years after the State of Jharkhand was formed is not adverted to . Even since State of Jharkhand was formed, it is 8 years . Even if one officer was sent from the Bihar Secretariat walking he had enough time to go pick up the service book and come back to Patna. No hand moved till this Court moved. The Bank draft, as mentioned in para 14 of the 2nd supplementary counter affidavit is handed over to the learned counsel for the petitioner, who has duly granted receipt for the same. Let a copy of this order be sent to the Chief Secretary, Govt. of Bihar,Patna, the Secretary, Personnel & Administrative Reforms, the Secretary, Finance Department, Govt. of Bihar and the Accountant General,Bihar,Patna, in the hope that they would use their good offices to do something effective in the matter. SINGH (Navaniti Pd. Singh,J)