IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.6623 of 2001 GAURI SHANKAR ROY Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 4/ 15/9/2008. I.A. No.3596/02 has been filed on behalf of the legal heirs of the original petitioner who is stated to have been deceased on 13.7.2002 for substitution by impleading them as petitioners. Details of the legal heirs are mentioned in paragraph-4 of the application. Having heard the counsels for the parties and that the claims in the writ application have financial implications for the heirs of the deceased petitioner, the same is allowed. The legal heirs shall be deemed to be substituted in place of the original petitioner. The deceased was suspended on 20.3.1984 which was revoked on 18.3.1985. He was again suspended on 11.4.1989 which was revoked on 4.9.1989. Under the latter, a departmental proceeding was initiated which resulted in what is termed as an „oral warning‟ only when no formal orders of punishment were passed, meaning thereby that the petitioner, for all practical purposes, was exonerated in law. - 2 - He came to this Court earlier in C.W.J.C. No.11379/96, disposed on 6.1.1998 when this Court ordered his exoneration in the departmental proceeding in absence of any orders of punishment. Directions were issued for full salary for the period “11.4.1989 to 4.9.1989”. The counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents is vague on this aspect and simply states that the same has been decided by the Government which has notified by Notification No.1813(S) dated 21.3.2001. No such notification is annexed to the counter affidavit. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits the helplessness of the legal heirs on this aspect in view of the demise of the employee. This Court, therefore, directs that the respondents shall verify if the full salary for the period “11.4.1989 to 4.9.1989” has been paid or not to the original petitioner and if he has not been paid, the actual financial benefits shall be made available to the legal heirs. Likewise, the counter affidavit is also - 3 - silent on the aspect of the salary for the period of waiting for posting from 19.3.1985 to 2.11.1985. For like reasons as mentioned above, this Court requires the respondents to examine their records and make the actual financial benefits available to the legal heirs. Insofar as the claim for salary for the period of suspension of 1984-1985 is concerned, this Court had declined relief originally in C.W.J.C. No.11379/96 as being stale with liberty to represent. This Court finds no reason to interfere with the order dated 3.11.1997 to that extent in terms of Rule-104 of the Bihar Financial Rules. The deceased was promoted as an In- charge Superintending Engineer on 29.9.1993. That he was fully eligible for substantive promotion now stands fructified by the order dated 21.3.2001 passed subsequently by the respondents granting him such promotion substantively from 6.10.1993, but only notionally without financial benefits till the date of his superannuation on 31.1.1996. Now that the contention of the petitioner of having illegally been denied promotion stands - 4 - confirmed by the action of the respondents themselves. This Court holds that the petitioner shall be entitled to the full salary of the post of Superintending Engineer from the date he was given officiating charge i.e. 29.9.1993 till his retirement on 31.1.1996, less what may have been paid to him in law. Let such payment also be maid to the legal heirs of the petitioner. The writ application is allowed to the extent indicated with directions that the monetary benefits of the reliefs allowed shall be made available to the legal heirs within a maximum period of three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. KC ( Navin Sinha,J )