IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA MJC No.680 of 2004 Smt. Prema Singh, wife of late Amarnath Singh presently residing at Dr. A.K. Singh, Flat No.42, Raghuvansh Apartment, P.S. Shastrinager, Dist. Patna. Permanent resident of near I.L.O., Old H.B. Road, Politene Corporation, P.S. Dist. Ranchi. ..... Petitioners. Versus 1. State of Bihar, through its Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna. 2. K.A. Subramaniam, Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna. 3. Jayat Lal Gupta, Secretary Cum Commissioner, Rural Development Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. 4. Baijnath Ram, Engineer In Chief cum Additional Commissioner cum Special Secretary, Rural Development Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. Also holding post of Engineer in Chief, Road Construction Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. Also holding post of Chief Engineer, National Highway Wing, Patna. 5. S.K. Sharma, Ex-Secretary cum Commissioner, Road Construction Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. 6. Shishir Sinha, Secretary cum Commissioner, Road Construction Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. 7. Pramod Triwary, Director, Provident Fund, Bihar, Patna. 8. R.K. Verma, Accountant General, Bihar, Patna. 9. Dr. Deepak Prasad, D.C., Patna. 10. Vijay Lakshami, Treasury Officer, Patna. 11. Adjutant General, Addl. Dte General of Personal Service Ajdutant General’s Branch, Army Headquarters, DHQ, P.O. New Delhi- 110011. 12. Controller of Defence Account(O), Golibar Maidan, Pune-1. 13. State of Jharkhand. 14. Secretary, Road Construction Department, State of Jharkhand, Ranchi. 15. Secretary, Department of Finance, State of Jharkhand, Ranchi. 16. Director, Provident Fund, State of Jharkhand, Ranchi. 17. District Provident Fund Officer, State of Jharkhand, Chaibasa. 2 18. Navin Kumar, Secretary, Department of Finance, State of Bihar, Patna. ... Opposite parties. ------- 16- 14.10.2009 Heard Mr. Ratnesh Kumar Singh for the petitioner, Learned Assistant Counsel to Government Pleader No.1, Mr. Sarvdeo Singh for the Union of India, and Mr. Neeraj Kumar for the State of Jharkhand. This application under Article 215 of the Constitution of India, read with section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, has been filed by the petitioner of C.W.J.C. No.10713 of 2000 (Smt. Prema Singh Vs. The State of Bihar and others), for the alleged non- implementation of the order dated 9.9.2002 (Annexure-1), whereby the writ petition was disposed of with a direction to opposite party no.6 herein to dispose of the petitioner’s representation for payment of the dues admissible to her late husband, and payable to her in the capacity of his widow. 2. A brief statement of facts essential for the disposal of this application may be indicated. Amarnath Singh, the petitioner’s late husband, was then in the services of the undivided State of Bihar and died on 24.10.1997, while still in harness. The present petitioner in the capacity of his widow preferred the 3 aforesaid C.W.J.C. No.10713 of 2000 for payment of the dues. The same was disposed of by order dated 9.9.2002, whereby opposite party no.6 herein was directed to dispose of the petitioner’s representation by a reasoned order and ensure payment of the lawful dues. The petitioner’s representation was disposed of and the entire dues were paid to her. 3. This matter was earlier taken up by this Court on 22.12.2008, on which date the petitioner’s submission was noted that the salary for the period 1.1.1985 to 24.10.1997 has been paid to the petitioner in December 2002, and a sum of Rs.79,820/- has been paid towards the deposit of the general provident fund. By order dated 22.12.2008, opposite party no.6 herein was directed to consider the petitioner’s sole surviving grievance as to the non-payment of interest on the deposits of general provident fund. Consequently opposite party no.6 passed the reasoned order dated 13.2.2009 (Annexure- E/6), wherein the claim of interest on the deposits of general provident fund on the following ground has been rejected: “;kfpdk esa of.kZr vof/k ds fy, Lo0 vej ukFk flag HkwriwoZ dk;Z0 vfHk0 Lo;a fudklh ,oa O;;u ink0 Fks ftUgksus Lo;a viuh osru dh fudklh ugh dh@ vr% th0ih0,Q0 en esa 4 dVkSrh djkus ,oa th0ih0,Q0 dVkSrh fooj.kh Hkstus dk iz’u gh ugha mBrk gS @ Lo0 flag Lo;a fudklh ,oa O;;u ink0 jgrs gq, osru dh fudklh ugh fd;k ftlds fy, foHkkx dks ftEesokj ugh Bgjk;k tk ldrk gS@“ 4. The petitioner has not filed a rejoinder to the same. It thus appears to us that the petitioner’s late husband did not draw his salary for the period 1.1.1985 to 24.10.1997 for the reason entirely attributable to him. The reason for denial of interest on the general provident fund cannot be faulted. We, therefore, constrained to reject this part of the petitioner’s claim. 5. This application is accordingly disposed of. (S K Katriar, J.) S.K.Pathak/