IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.5283 of 2010 1. Dharmnath Sahni S/O Basudeo Sahni R/O Vill.- Saidpur Amar Singh Asthan, Sonepur, P.O.- Sonepur, Distt.- Saran At Chapra 2. Bhagwan Sahni S/O Daroga Sahni R/O Vill.- Saidpur Amar Singh Asthan, Sonepur, P.O.- Sonepur, Distt.- Saran At Chapra 3. Anil Sahni S/O Late Ram Balak Sahni R/O Vill.- Saidpur Amar Singh Asthan, Sonepur, P.O.- Sonepur, Distt.- Saran At Chapra 4. Manjay Sahni S/O Lagan Deo Sahni R/O Vill.- Saidpur Amar Singh Asthan, Sonepur, P.O.- Sonepur, Distt.- Saran At Chapra 5. Supan Sahni S/O Late Mosafir Sahni R/O Vill.- Saidpur Amar Singh Asthan, Sonepur, P.O.- Sonepur, Distt.- Saran At Chapra 6. Sanjay Kumar Mahto S/O Late Sukhlal Mahto R/O Vill.- Saidpur Amar Singh Asthan, Sonepur, P.O.- Sonepur, Distt.- Saran At Chapra 7. Kishori Sahni S/O Fudeni Sahni R/O Vill.- Saidpur Amar Singh Asthan, Sonepur, P.O.- Sonepur, Distt.- Saran At Chapra 8. Chandeshwar Sahni S/O Sri Fudeni Sahni R/O Vill.- Saidpur Amar Singh Asthan, Sonepur, P.O.- Sonepur, Distt.- Saran At Chapra 9. Jagan Sahni S/O Rama Sahni R/O Vill.- Saidpur Amar Singh Asthan, Sonepur, P.O.- Sonepur, Distt.- Saran At Chapra 10. Jhulpan Sahni S/O Chamar Sahni R/O Vill.- Saidpur Amar Singh Asthan, Sonepur, P.O.- Sonepur, Distt.- Saran At Chapra 11. Sheo Kumar Sahni S/O Ganaur Sahni R/O Vill.- Saidpur Amar Singh Asthan, Sonepur, P.O.- Sonepur, Distt.- Saran At Chapra 12. Hari Ballabh Sahni S/O Sri Fudeni Sahni R/O Vill.- Saidpur Amar Singh Asthan, Sonepur, P.O.- Sonepur, Distt.- Saran At Chapra 13. Harendra Mahto S/O Late Surya Mahto R/O Vill.- Saidpur Amar Singh Asthan, Sonepur, P.O.- Sonepur, Distt.- Saran At Chapra 14. Shree Deo Narain Sahni S/O Jagdeo Sahni R/O Vill.- Saidpur Amar Singh Asthan, Sonepur, P.O.- Sonepur, Distt.- Saran At Chapra 15. Ramchandra Sahni S/O Jagdeo Sahni R/O Vill.- Saidpur Amar Singh Asthan, Sonepur, P.O.- Sonepur, Distt.- Saran At Chapra Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. The Chief Secretary State Of Bihar, Old Secretariat, Patna-1 3. The Secretary, Disaster Management Department, Government Of Bihar, Patna-1 4. District Magistrate, Madhepura, Distt.- Madhepura 5. District Magistrate, Supaul, Distt.- Supaul 6. The Circle Officer, Udwant Nagar Circle, Distt.- Bhojpur At Ara 7. The District Magistrate, Bhojpur. ----------- 6 02.09.2011 Heard Mr. Vivekanand Vivek, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Shanker Kumar, learned A.C. to A.A.G.15 for the State. The writ petition has been filed seeking direction to the respective District Authorities of Supaul and Madhepura to make 2 payment of the wages of the petitioners for having served the respondents during the flood of 2008. A prayer for payment towards the boats as well as for compensation for lost boats were also made. During the pendency of the proceedings and under direction of this Court as noted in the order dated 18.07.2011, a verification exercise was carried out at the level of the District Magistrate, Supaul and District Magistrate, Madhepura. It is not in dispute that in so far as the petitioner Nos. 4, 6 to 9 and 11 to 13 are concerned they have received their respective payments from the District Magistrate, Madhepura through the officer so authorized on his behalf. The said information was brought on record of the proceedings by way of a counter affidavit. A further counter affidavit was filed on behalf of the District Magistrate, Supaul mentioning therein that as the petitioner Nos. 1 to 3, 5, 10, 14 and 15 had surrendered their boats with the District Administration of Bhojpur at Ara hence the payment to which they were found entitled had been forwarded by the District Administration of Supaul to the District Magistrate, Bhojpur at Ara for onward payment to the claimants. It is not in dispute that the name of the petitioners finds mention in the list of the claimants. It was thus contended that if the petitioner would present themselves before the District Magistrate, Bhojpur at Ara, they would not only receive their wages but also the payment towards compensation for loss of boats. It was further contended that although there was a dispute as to whether these petitioners had ever discharged their duties and /or surrendered their boats, but the District Administration taking a holistic view of the 3 matter had decided to make payment to these petitioners without going into intricacies of the matter. The matter was thus thereafter adjourned requiring learned State counsel to verify the position from the District Magistrate, Bhojpur at Ara as to the date fixed for enabling these petitioner Nos. 1 to 3, 5, 10,14 and 15 to present themselves for taking payment. Today when this matter has been taken up, learned State counsel on instructions received from the District Magistrate, Bhojpur at Ara informs this Court that during the pendency of the proceedings the entire payment to which the petitioner Nos. 2, 3, 5 and 15 were found entitled has since been made over to the them together with compensation amount. It is further contended that the compensation amount for the loss of boats has also been made over to the remaining petitioner Nos. 1, 10 and 14 but they have not presented themselves to receive the wages amount of Rs. 1900/- and which would be paid to the said petitioners on their appearance. That practically brings to an end the larger controversy regarding non payment of the claims. A dispute has now been raised as regarding the rate at which the payment of wages has been paid to these petitioners. According to the petitioners whereas their services had been engaged on a promise of payment of wages at the rate of Rs. 300/- per day but the District Administration has deviated from the said promise as evinced from the logbooks and has instead made payment at a lower rate. It is thus contended that these petitioners were entitled for payment at the rates mentioned in their respective logbooks i.e. Rs. 300/- per day. Be that as it may, as the admissible amount found payable by 4 the District Administration has been made over to the petitioners the cause of action as raised in the writ petition stands redressed. The writ petitioners if so aggrieved by the rates, may raise their grievance before the appropriate authority and who shall consider and dispose of the same in accordance with law. Bibhash (Jyoti Saran, J.)