IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA MJC No.335 of 2007 1. BINAY KUMAR SINHA 2. ABHAY KUMAR SINHA, BOTH SONS OF LATE BALRAM KUMAR SINHA, BOTH RESIDENTS OF PANCHWATI COLONY, BADI PATAN DEVI, GULZARBAGH, P.S. ALAMGANJ, DISTRICT- PATNA... PETITIONERS Versus 1. STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE COMMISSIONER CUM SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, OLD SECRETARIAT, PATNA. 2. SRI NAVIN KUMAR, THE COMMISSIONER-CUM- SECRETARY, DEPTT. OF FINANCE, GOVT. OF BIHAR, OLD SECRETARIAT, PATNA. 3. SRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH, THE DEPUTY SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE, GOVT. OF BIHAR. 4. AJAY KUMAR SINHA, SUPERINTENDENT IN-CHARGE, SECRETARIAT, GOVT. PRESS, P.S. ALAMGANJ, GULZARBAGH, PATNA ............... OPPOSITE PARTIES. -------------- 4 07-10-2009 From the affidavit filed on behalf of petitioners in reply to show cause of the opposite parties it appears that a number of documents contained in annexure-5 series have been annexed to show that petitioners are sons of late Balram Kumar Sinha. Only a small amount of Rs. 3120/- is involved in this case and the issue is whether it should be paid to the petitioners without producing succession certificate or they should be asked to go through the formalities which are necessary for payment. Considering the documents produced on behalf of petitioners contained in annexures-5 series, this Court is, prima facie, satisfied that petitioners’ claim that they are sons of late Balram Kumar Sinha is correct. The only stumbling block for the petitioner is said to be a declaration by late Balram Kumar Sinha after his retirement that he has no family members. That document has been - 2 - annexed as a part of annexure-g to the supplementary show cause. A careful perusal of that document creates an impression that at the time of his retirement late Balram Kumar Sinha whose wife had pre- deceased him did not consider his sons to be his family members. It does not amount to be a positive evidence that he had no sons. The other relevant records of the period when late Balram Kumar Sinha joined the service may throw more light on the issue. Considering the small amount involved in this case the respondents are directed to pay the admitted dues on account of difference of salary amounting to Rs. 3120/- to the petitioner after obtaining an undertaking that in case their claim is contested by any person they would be liable to refund the amount. The contempt petition is finally disposed of. ( Shiva Kirti Singh,ACJ) Naresh