IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LPA No.1107 of 2002 MRS. SUNITA DEVI, w/o late Shekhar Kumar Singh, resident of Village – Kumar Dove, P.O. Dighi, Siwanpur, Via- Ishipur, District – Godda (S.P.) 813206. ….Petitioner-Appellant. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR through the Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Old Secretariat, Patna. 2. The Commissioner-cum-Secretary, Public Health Engineering Department, Patna. 3. The Additional Secretary, Public Health Engineering Department, Patna. 4. The Superintending Engineer, Public Health Mechanical Department, Mechanical Circle, Bhagalpur. 5. The Executive Engineer, Public Health Engineering Department, Mechanical Commissionery, Dumka. 6. Director Provident Fund Bihar, Patna. 7. The Accountant General, Bihar, Patna. 8. Treasury Officer, Dumka. …. Respondents-Respondents. For the Appellant : - Sri Ram Hriday Prasad, Advocate. For the Respondents : - Sri Maruth Nath Roy, A.C. to S.C. XI For the Accountant General: - Sri G.P. Karn, Advocate. ----------- 8/ 05.05.2009 Heard the parties. The writ petition preferred by the appellant has been dismissed summarily on the ground that late husband of the appellant had worked only in a work charged establishment and therefore, entitled to limited facilities on death but was not entitled to other post retiral benefits. The benefits of group insurance and GPF had already been paid, but the claim for family pension and some other death cum retiral benefits was not allowed by the writ court. Before this Court learned counsel for the appellant - 2 - make a direct challenge to the stand of the respondents as noted by the writ court that husband of the appellant was in work charged establishment and claimed that he was appointed in regular establishment. A copy of the appointment letter and some other documents were brought on record through a rejoinder petition in order to meet the definite stand of the respondents in the counter affidavit that late Shekhar Kumar Singh, husband of the appellant was an employee only in work charged establishment. In reply to the rejoinder, a supplementary counter affidavit has been brought on record enclosing therewith photo copy of entire service book of the husband of the appellant. That service book is clearly more reliable than the photo copy of service book annexed as Annexure-1 to the rejoinder petition. Annexure-1 does not contain many relevant pages of the service book, which has been annexed as Annexure-C to the second counter affidavit. On perusal of the service book contained in Annexure-C, we find that the stand of the respondents is correct and justified that at the time of appointment of the husband of appellant on the post of driver there was no - 3 - vacancy in that post in the regular establishment and therefore, he was appointed as a driver in the work charged establishment of the department. Since his appointment in November, 1982 till his death in February, 1984 he appears to have continued only in work charged establishment as a driver. The controversy on facts thus settled, we find no good ground to interfere with the order of the writ court under appeal. This appeal is dismissed as one without merit. DKS/ (Shiva Kirti Singh, J.) (Dharnidhar Jha, J.)