IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.9252 of 2007 1. M.B.Aroygaya Sansthan through its President Ram Surat Prasad Sinha, Address- Mohalla-Mubarakganj, P.O.-Sasaram, P.S.-Sasaram, District-Rohtas. 2. Ram Surat Prasad sinha, son of Late Ram Kailash Prasad President M.B. Aroygaya Sansthan, Address- Mohalla-Mubarakganj, P.O.- Sasaram, P.S.-Sasaram, District-Rohtas. ………Petitioners. Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. The Health Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna. 3. State Health Society through its Secretary, Sheikhpura Bailey Road, Patna. 4. Secretary, State Health Society, Sheikhpura Bailey Road, Patna. 5. The District Magistrate, Rohtas cum Chairman District Health Society, Sasaram, Rohtas. 6. Civil Surgeon, Rohtas cum Secretary, Health Committee, Rohtas, Sasaram. ………Respondents. ----------- 02. 13.02.2009 Counter affidavit on behalf of the Civil Surgeon who is the Secretary of the District Health Committee and the Chief Medical Officer of the District show a very sorry picture. Petitioner is a N.G.O. who had undertaken to do certain works for the District Health Committee like washing and providing Ambulance services. He was required to furnish his bills every month which he did. As is usual, for reasons that can not be discussed, payments were denied to be given to the petitioner. Thereafter he informed the committee that he would not carry on his services without payment and as such he stopped providing services from 1.12.2006. - 2 - After repeated request when his due payments were not made by the competent authority, he approached this Court for payment of his dues. Now a counter affidavit is being filed in which the Civil Surgeon states that the work of the petitioner was not found satisfactory in a meeting that was held on 31.01.2007. What this Court finds is that petitioner has stopped his services in December, 2006 itself. There is not a chit of paper much less any warning or communication to the petitioner ever during petitioner’s tenure that his work was unsatisfactory. It is apparent that once petitioner prays for payment everything becomes unsatisfactory for reasons which this Court can not discuss. It is not only regrettable but shameful conduct. If State continues to conduct itself in such a manner, the State Health Committee or the District Health Committee is bound to collapse without the services given to the citizen by the petitioner. There should be at least a communication to him during his tenure about deficiency of his services, but none has been alleged nor filed. Right to receive prompt payment is always conterminous with service rendered. In view of the aforesaid, I direct the District Health Committee to reconsider the matter and settle the dispute once and for all because if this attitude of the - 3 - District Health Committee is known to people then no one would come forward to burn his finger again and ultimate sufferers would be the citizens. Reconsideration must be made within one month from the production of the order of this Court before the District Magistrate cum Chairman of the District Health Committee and petitioner should be heard in the matter and the Authority will pass a speaking order duly communicated to the petitioner within the said period. Writ petition is thus disposed of. Shageer (Navaniti Prasad Singh, J)