IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.7975 of 2009 SMT.RINA DEVI w/o late Kedar Nath Prasad, resident of village- Bhetaulia, P.S. Goraul, District- Vaishali. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR through the Secretary –cum- Commissioner, Transport Department,Govt. of Bihar,Patna. 2. The Bihar State Road Transport Corporation through its Managing Director,Pariwahan Bhawan,Birchand Patel Path, Patna. 3. Managing Director, Bihar State Road Transport Corporation through its Managing Director,Pariwahan Bhawan,Birchand Patel Path, Patna. 4. Administrator, Bihar State Road Transport Corporation through its Managing Director,Pariwahan Bhawan,Birchand Patel Path, Patna. 5. Divisional Manager,Bihar State Road Transport Corporation, Muzaffarpur. ----------- 5 15.10.2009 Petitioner’s husband was a Conductor in the Bihar State Road Transport Corporation in which he was assigned and was working, met with an accident at Gandhi Setu in beween Patna and Hajipur. He died on the spot while in service. As a consequence of that accident, petitioner- the widow seeks compassionate appointment. Sri P.K.Verma, learned AAG-XI, who appears for the Corporation, submits that the Corporation is already over burdened with its employees. It is sick. It needs to drastically reduce its work force. It has been decided not to give any compassionate appointment instead preparing waiting list in order of seniority and as and when situation turns favourable to a limited extend, they may be considered for compassionate appointment. Petitioner is at serial no. 1073 in the waiting list of compassionate appointment. He submits that accordingly leave of compassionate appointment cannot be granted. While the - 2 - matter was argued then question arises whether any other retiral dues have been paid or not? Petitioner’s counsel submits that since 11.5.2007, the date of death, petitioner has been paid on ad hoc basis a sum totaling to about Rs. 34,000/- including Rs. 5,000/- as funeral expenses as ex gratia payment. This Court finds it to be a peculiar situation where an employee died in course of duty, no compensation is given nor death cum retiral due is paid. Not only that, the petitioner is entitled to compensation under Workmen Compensation Act. There is no whisper in this regard by the Corporation. All that is said is that petitioner may take appropriate steps in this regard, as he may be advised. In other words, the stand is that unless the petitioner makes due application as contemplated under the Workmen Compensation Act, no claim thereunder is payable by the Corporation. It further appears that to get compensation, petitioner is then required to move Motor Vehicle Accident Claim Tribunal. These facts disclose disturbing the state of affairs. It discloses total insensitive on the part of appropriate authority to the plight of a widow. When it came to question of payment, death cum retiral due, Sri Verma refers to a Division Bench judgment of this Court in the case of Rajya Path Pariwahan Kamgar –v- Union of India & ors. since reported in 2003(4)PLJR 499 wherein in para 3 order of the Apex Court has been quoted wherein the Apex Court has restrained any Court or Authority from passing order in consistent with the order of the Apex Court in relation to salary etc. payable to employees of the Corporation. In my view, that was in 2003 , much water has flown in - 3 - Jamuna at Delhi and Ganga at Patna since then . There is subsequent order of the Apex Court in the same very case dated 12.8.2008 wherein in categorical term the Apex Court has directed payment of salary, retiral due and other benefits including death cum retiral due to all employees within six months. It is specifically stated therein that both the Corporations shall pay the full salary to the employees. Now if full salary of employees have to be paid by the Corporation , it would be travesty of justice to deny her share or death cum retiral due. There is yet another order of the Apex Court being order dated 17.3.2009 passed in the same very case wherein the Apex Court has noted that the Bihar State Road Transport Corporation has paid the current salary of the staff but has not yet taken any step to pay the arrears as also the retiral benefits. Mr. Verma for the Corporation says that all these directions are primarily meant for the State Government, who have to make available the funds to the Corporation and till such funds are available it cannot do anything in the matter. However, I need not finally decide this issue as learned counsel for the petitioner fairly states that a separate writ petition for payment of death cum retiral due is pending in this Court wherein these issues may be suitably taken up and decided in presence of the State itself. In this helpless situation, the writ petition is disposed of. singh (Navaniti Prasad Singh,J)