IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.9194 of 2006 SMT.MANJULA KUMARI, wife of Sri Ranjeet Prasad Singh, (ANM) (Auxiliary Nurse Midwife), Primary Health Sub-Centre, Pargarhi, Sabour, P.S. Sabour, in the district of Bhagalpur. … Petitioner. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. The Director in Chief, Health Service, Bihar, Patna. 3. The Civil Surgeon-cum-Chief Medical Officer, Bhagalpur. 4. The Incharge Civil Surgeon, Primary Health Centre, Sabour. … Respondents. ----------- 3. 13.08.2010 Heard counsel for the petitioner and counsel for the State. The prayer of the petitioner in this writ petition reads as follows:- “1. That the present writ application by the petitioner a citizen of India arises out of arrears of salary and order of transfer communicated to the petitioner in Letter No.3194, dated 23rd June, 2006 issued by the Civil Surgeon- cum-Chief Medical Officer, Bhagalpur in obedience to the letter issued by the Directorate contained in letter No. 736(4)Health, dated 6.5.2006 without paying arrears of salary, also arrears of ACP granted to the petitioner w.e.f. 8.9.99, till today.” With regard to the aforementioned prayer the counsel for the petitioner would submit that now the petitioner has been paid almost all the dues except payment of salary 5.9.2000 to 17.1.2001 and 40% of the 2 ACP benefits inasmuch as the payment of 60% of the ACP has already been made to the petitioner. In that view of the matter the Respondents are directed to look into this part of the grievance of payment of remaining 40% benefit of ACP and if the same is admissible and payable to the petitioner it must be paid to him within a period three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. It is however made clear that if for any reason the said amount of ACP is not found payable to the petitioner, the respondents would be under obligation to communicate the reasons for the same within the same time. So far the claim of the petitioner for payment of salary for the period 5.9.2000 to 17.1.2001 is concerned, the respondents have categorically, in paragraph 5 of the counter affidavit, raised a plea that after the petitioner was transferred from Primary Health Centre, Sabour to Primary Health Centre, Kalagaun vide Letter No. 1890 dated. 30.6.2000 and was also relieved on 5.9.2000, she had remained absent herself and therefore she was not found entitled for payment of salary for the period 3 5.9.2007 to 17.1.2001, in which she had not worked and performed her duty. Counsel for the petitioner would however submit that the petitioner was in fact marking her attendance at Primary Health Centre, Sabour even after her being relieved because she had made a representation for staying her transfer. In the opinion of this Court the moment this is admitted and in fact it has been done so by the petitioner by not specifically controverting this part of the relieving story of the respondent asserted in paragraph 5 of the counter affidavit even in the rejoinder affidavit filed by the petitioner that the petitioner stood relieved from Sabour on 5.9.2000 and did not report at the transferred place, her so-called signing the attendance register at Sabour from where she had already been relieved would be of no avail. Consequently, this Court would not find any merit in the claim for payment of salary for the aforementioned period and the same is hereby rejected. With the aforementioned observations and directions, this writ application is disposed of. kanchan/ ( Mihir Kumar Jha, J.) 4