IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.13839 of 2008 Sumitra Devi, Wife of Late Atmanand Singh, Resident of Village – Chatma Bazar, Post Office – Chatmadih, Police Station – Shambhuganj, District – Banka (Bihar). -------- Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Bihar through the Home Commissioner, Home Department, Old Secretariat, Patna. 2. Director General of Police, Bihar, Old Secretariat, Patna. 3. Inspector General of Police (Karmik) Bihar, Patna. 4. Deputy Inspector General of Police (Karmik), Bihar, Patna. 5. Superintendent of Police, Nalanda. ------- Respondents ---------------------------------- 4 01.12.2011 Heard Sri Deepak Kumar Sinha, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Maruth Nath Roy, learned A.C. to Standing Counsel No. 25, appearing on behalf of all the Respondents. The husband of the petitioner was an ‘Assistant Sub- Inspector of Police’ and while he was on patrolling duty he was killed in encounter with criminals. The petitioner while filing the present writ petition had prayed for directing the Respondents to pay ex-gratia grant, ‘Paropkari Bhatta’, due salary from the year 1994 to 2001, grant of A.C.P. and fixation of full pension. In this case a counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of Respondent No. 5/ Superintendent of Police, Nalanda. It has been categorically stated that after the death of husband of the petitioner amounts of gratuity, leave encashment, group insurance were already paid and the petitioner was also getting full pension and son of the petitioner was also given appointment on compassionate ground. Regarding grant of A.C.P. it has been clarified that claim for A.C.P. has already been rejected vide order dated 26.12.2007. Regarding amount of ‘Paropkari Bhatta’ the Respondent No. 5 has 2 stated that matter is pending consideration before the Department and decision will be taken within one month. Similarly, in respect of due salary of husband of the petitioner from 1994 to 2001, the Respondent has admitted the same and it has been stated that it will be paid to the petitioner immediately. On the subject of ‘Anugrah Anudan’ i.e. ex-gratia grant, as per affidavit Rs. 2,50,000/- has already been sanctioned on 23.11.2011. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was entitled to get ten lakhs as ex-gratia. However, the authority concerned has sanctioned only Rs. 2,50,000/-. If so advised, the petitioner may avail other remedy regarding ex-gratia amount. In view of the facts as stated in the counter affidavit, it is desirable to direct the Respondents to pay admitted due salary as per statement made in paragraph no. 7 of the counter affidavit within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. So far as claim for A.C.P. is concerned, it has been rejected by the competent authority and since this court is considering the matter relating to retiral dues no order can be passed on this issue. If so advised the petitioner may take appropriate step. The court expects that as stated in paragraph no. 6 regarding payment of ‘Paropkari Bhatta’, the Department may take final decision without any delay. Accordingly, with above observation and direction the writ petition stands disposed of. Praful ( Rakesh Kumar, J.)