IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LPA No.1242 of 2009 Shanti Devi, Widow of Late Bameshwar Sharma, C/o Shri Rajeshwar Sharma, Resident of Swami Sahjanand Nagar Jharudih, Near Dr. B.N. Singh, P.O., P.S., District and Town Dhanbad (Jharkhand). ---------- Petitioner/Appellant Versus 1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary-cum- Commissioner, Department of Water Resources, Bihar, Patna. 2. The Director, Directorate of Water Management and Irrigation Improvement and Reforms, Anisabad, Patna. 3. The Chief Engineer, Hydrology Project Preparation, Department of Water Resources, Bihar, Patna. 4. The Principal Secretary-cum-Commissioner, Finance Department, Bihar, Patna. 5. The Joint Secretary, Department of Water Resources Development and Food Control, Bihar, Patna. 6. The Executive Engineer, Western Koshi Canal Division, Raj Biraj, District Raj Biraj (Nepal). 7. The Deputy Secretary, Water Resources Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. --------- Respondent/Respondents ----------- 2 10.03.2010 Questioning the legal propriety of the order dated 31.8.2009 passed by the learned single Judge in C.W.J.C. No. 10998 of 2009, the present intra-court appeal has been preferred. On a perusal of the order passed by the learned single Judge, it is manifest that he has declined to grant interest to the present appellant who put forth a claim on behalf of her husband late Bameshwar Sharma, who died while serving as an Assistant Engineer. 2 Be it noted, the husband of the appellant was given promotion on the basis of Memo No. 2349 dated 17.9.1997 with effect from 21.10.1982 and this Court by order dated 2.12.2005 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 6711 of 2004 had directed that the late husband of the petitioner- appellant was entitled for benefit of promotional post with effect from 21.10.1982 and settle the family pension on that basis. The learned single Judge has observed that she had been given arrears of promotional benefits in monetary terms for the said period. In view of the aforesaid, the learned single Judge had declined to grant interest. In our considered opinion, if the entire factual scenario is adjudged on the backdrop of earlier order, the claim of interest is not tenable and accordingly, we concur with the order passed by the learned single Judge. In the result, the appeal, being devoid of any merit, stands dismissed in limine. Rishi (Dipak Misra, CJ.) (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)