IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LPA No.817 of 2008 ***** Swami Nath Sahu son of Sukhal Sah, Resident of Village Pagur Kothi, Police Station Pachrukhi, District Siwan. …. …. (Petitioner) - Appellant Versus 1. The State of Bihar through the Commissioner-cum-Secretary Department of Co-operative, Govt. of Bihar New Secretariat, Patna. 2. The Registrar, Department of Co-operative, Govt. of Bihar New Secretariat, Patna. 3. The Managing Director-cum-Member Secretary, the Siwan Central Co-operative Bank Ltd. Siwan. …. …. (Respondent) – Respondents. ----------- For the Appellant : Mr. Udit Narain Singh, Advocate Mr. Kundan Kumar Sinha, Advocate For the Respondent Nos. 1 & 2: Mr. Lalit Kishore, Additional Advocate General-III For the Respondent No.3 : Mr. Uday Chand Prasad, Advocate Mr. Binod Kumar Sinha, Advocate ------------ P R E S E N T Hon'ble the Chief Justice & Hon'ble Mr. Justice Kishore K. Mandal ------------ Dated, the 21st October, 2008. The Single Judge considered the matter thus: “Since the validity of the modality right from the year, 1993 has been upheld by the High Court and reaffirmed in various decisions thereafter, the Court has no option but to hold that even though petitioners are entitled for payment of their salaries but the obligation of payment shall be met from the corpus which has to be created in which the petitioners as Paid Managers have a major contribution to make. If in the District Cadre Fund Account No. 1 there is no money available for payment, - 2 - then a direction cannot be issued under Article 226 of the Constitution, contrary to the circulars and the rules laid down by the State Government while exercising power under section 66B of the Act, to make payments to these petitioners irrespective of the policy in this regard.” 2. The counsel for the appellant admitted before us that there is no money available in the District cadre fund. In this view of the matter, the view of the Single Judge cannot be faulted. 3. In any case the Single Judge has taken care in observing that as and when funds are made available from the District Cadre Fund, the respondents concerned have a duty to settle the accounts and make payments in this regard, if not already paid. This is what the Single Judge has observed: - “It is however clarified in each and every case that if the petitioners fulfill the criteria and the necessary funds are available from the District Cadre Fund, the respondents concerned have a duty to settle the accounts and make payments in this regard if not already done. If any claim is disputed or negated then the concerned respondent is duty bound to furnish requisite facts and figures why the salary for the period claimed or in portion thereof cannot be paid to these petitioners.” 4. L.P.A. does not deserve to be admitted. It is dismissed in limine. R. M. Lodha, CJ Kishore K. Mandal, J Pawan/-