IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.14802 of 2004 1. KAMLA DEVI WIFE OF LATE RAM KEWAL SINGH 2. LAXMINIA DEVI WIFE OF LATE CHCHOTAN SINGH, BOTH RESIDENTS OF VILLAGE- KHARASIN, P.S. KARPI (SHAHAR TELPA O.P.), DISTRICT ARWAL – PETITIONERS. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE DEPUTY SECRETARY, HOME, (SPECIAL), DEPARTMENT, BIHAR, OLD SECRETARIAT, PATNA. 2. THE COMMISSIONER, MAGADH DIVISION, GAYA. 3. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, ARWAL. 4. THE BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, SONBHADRA- BANSHI, SURYAPUR, ARWAL – RESPONDENTS. ----------- For the petitioners: Mr. Vijay Kumar, Adv. For the State : Mr. Jai Shankar Barnwal, S.C. I ------- 4/ 21-04-2011 Heard the parties. 2. The petitioners have filed the present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India raising a grievance against an order contained in Memo no. 191Sa. Arbal dated 22nd September, 2004 (Annexure- 3) passed by District Magistrate, Arwal, whereby ex gratia amount of Rs. 50,000/- given to both the petitioners separately for the death of their respective husbands at the hands of the extremists, has been directed to be withdrawn/recovered. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that on 25.02.2003, Ram Kewal Singh and Chhotan Singh, husbands of petitioner no.1 and 2, respectively, were killed at the hands of the extremists. In that view of the matter, petitioner no.1 and 2 both were 2 granted compensation of Rs. 50,000/- each by way of ex gratia and amounts were deposited in a fixed deposit in the Bank in their respective accounts. However, by the impugned order dated 22nd September, 2004 (Annexure- 3), on the basis of internal communications between the respondent- District Magistrate and some other State officials, the compensation amount granted to the petitioners have been directed to be withdrawn. The Branch Manager of the concerned Bank has been directed to transfer the said amount in the account of respondent Block Development Officer, Sonebhadra in the district of Arwal. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that before passing the impugned order neither any show cause notice was issued nor any opportunity of hearing was given to the petitioners by the respondent District Magistrate. It is further highlighted that the criminal cases, which have been referred in the impugned order, in which deceased husbands of the petitioners were accused persons, have finally been decided and other accused persons have been acquitted and because of death of the husbands of the petitioners, proceeding against them was dropped. 5. Learned Standing Counsel no.1, while opposing the prayer made on behalf of the petitioners, 3 has placed reliance on the averments made in the counter-affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents as also on the policy decision of the State Government, as contained in Annexure-A, to the said counter affidavit. He submits that since the deceased husbands of the petitioners were accused in some criminal cases, therefore, the respondent District Magistrate was fully justified in withdrawing the compensation awarded to the petitioners. 6. After hearing the parties and on consideration of the materials available on record, this Court is of the considered opinion that before passing the impugned order dated 22nd September, 2004(Annexure- 3), the respondent District Magistrate was obliged to give an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners. Apparently, the principles of natural justice have not been complied with in the present case. 7. In the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the impugned order dated 22nd September, 2004 (Annexure-3) is hereby set aside. The matter is remitted to the respondent District Magistrate, Arwal for passing a fresh order, in accordance with law, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners. 8. For early disposal of the matter, the petitioners are hereby directed to appear before 4 respondent District Magistrate within a period of four weeks from today with a certified copy of the present order as also a detailed representation showing their entitlement for the compensation in view of death of their respective husbands. If such a representation is filed, the respondent District Magistrate shall be obliged to decide the same in accordance with law after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners and all other concerned persons/authorities within a period of three months from the date of filing of such representation. 9. It is made clear that if the petitioners do not appear before the respondent- District Magistrate within the aforesaid period of four weeks with a certified copy of the present order along with their representation, then it shall be constructed that the present writ petition has finally been rejected by this Court. 10. With the aforesaid observations/ directions, this writ petition stands disposed of. No costs. BTiwary/ (Birendra Prasad Verma, J.)