IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.6762 of 2010 1. Sri Sunil Mohan Prasad S/O Late Mathura Prasad R/O Moh Dumaria, P.O.Anisabad, P.S.Gardanibagh, Distt-Patna Versus 1. The State Of Bihar Through Its Chief Secretary Old Secretariat, Patna 2. Principal Secretary, Rural Development Department Patna 3. Chief Engineer, Rural Development Department , Special Division Patna 4. Executive Engineer Rural Development , Special Division No.1, Gaya ----------- 3. 19.09.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. The claim in this application is to allow the petitioner to mark his attendance and to pay him his arrears of salary as also current salary from June, 2002. On 9.5.2002 the petitioner was transferred from Buxar to Gaya in the Rural Works Department No. 3 (Gaya). On 25.6.2002, he was relieved for joining the transferred place of posting. His representation dated 15.12.2004 makes it more than apparent that he was endeavouring to have his transfer rescinded and left with no option he ultimately joined at Gaya in September, 2003. The Court is therefore satisfied that on his own showing the petitioner has not been able to make out a case for a mandamus for arrears of salary from 25.6.2002 till he submitted his joining in September, 2003. 2 This shall be without prejudice to his other rights in respect of the said period. For the period thereafter, the petitioner alleges that he was not allowed to join and work. The counter affidavit by one Shree Anil Sharma Executive Engineer, Rural Works Development No. 3 at Gaya states that there is only one sanctioned post of Blue Printer (a post that the petitioner holds) at Gaya and on which Shri Ramdahin Sharma was working. Sri Sharma had not been transferred elsewhere. In absence of any vacancy the question of accepting the joining of the petitioner does not arise. The allegations that the petitioner was not allowed to join are frivolous as the petitioner himself never reported. The deponent had no knowledge of the representation stated to have been submitted by the petitioner on 15.12.2004. The petitioner had never submitted his joining at Gaya and had discharged no duties. The representation of the petitioner at Annexure-2, a Xerox copy, bears sufficient official endorsement to prima facie opine that it was in fact submitted before the authorities. A rejoinder has been filed to the counter affidavit. It encloses an order dated 9.5.2002 3 transferring Shri Ramdahin Sharma to Motihari. The petitioner alleges that the respondents were helping Shri Ramdahin Sharma to continue at Gaya contrary to the order of his transfer. Since the document and allegations have been placed by way of rejoinder, the respondents have had no opportunity to deal with the same. Rather than adjourning the matter it is disposed with directions. The writ application raises purely administrative issue being thrust upon the Court in the form of litigation where none really appears to be existing. For the period after September 2003, let the petitioner appear before the Chief Engineer who shall grant a personal hearing to the petitioner in the presence of the deponent Shree Anil Sharma and after hearing both of them and examining the original records including the issue of transfer of Shri Ramdahin Sharma, his date of relieving etc. as the case may be, proceed to pass final orders on the petitioner’s claim for salary. Needless to state that if the petitioner was prevented from working for reasons not attributable to him he cannot be denied salary on the principle of no work no pay. The salary paid to him may be 4 recovered from the salary of those who prevented him from working as in no event the State shall bear the liability for the same. Let the Chief Engineer, Rural Works Department No. 3 at Gaya in the aforesaid manner pass a reasoned and speaking order dealing with all aspects of the issue with clarity so that judicial review, if the need arises, is facilitated. Let such appropriate order be passed within a maximum period of two months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. Needless to state that if the Chief Engineer finds justification in the claim or in any part of the claim, necessary consequential orders for payment shall be issued simultaneously. The writ application stands disposed. P. Kumar ( Navin Sinha, J.)