IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.11798 of 2006 Dr. Arjun Ram, Son of Jagdish Ram, Resident of Village Diawan, P.S. Karaiparsaria, District Nalanda. -------- Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Bihar through the Secretary, Department of Health and Family Welfare, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 2. Joint Secretary, Department of Health and Family Welfare, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 3. Deputy Secretary, Department of Health and Family Welfare, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 4. Civil Surgeon cum Chief Medical Officer, Bhojpur, Ara. 5. Incharge Medical Officer, Primary Health Centre, Sandesh, Bhojpur. --------- Respondents ----------- 2 20.08.2010 No one appears on behalf of the petitioner. Counsel for the State is present and would submit that there is a full justification for non-payment of salary of the petitioner, inasmuch as, with regard to his following prayer:- “2(i) To directing the respondents to pay held up salary of the petitioner of the such period as follows:- from 16th oct 2003 to 18.10.2003, 12.03.2004 to 16.03.2004 16.07.2004 to 20.07.2004 01.11.2004 to 03.11.2004 14.06.2005 17.06.2005 to 24.06.2005 28.07.2005 and also 02.09.2005 to 03.09.2005 and the same has not been paid to the petitioner.” 2 the respondents have explained the same in paragraph no.7 of the counter affidavit that:- “7. That it is humbly stated and submitted that the salary of the petitioner has been withheld for the period from 16.10.2004 16.07.2004 to 20.07.2004, 01.11.2004, to 3.11.2004, 14.06.2005, 17.06.2005, to 24.06.2005 28.07.2005 and 02.09.2005 to 03.09.2005, Except from the aforesaid period all admissible amount of salary or whatsoever has been paid to the petitioner. Salary of the petitioner for the aforesaid period has been held up due to willful absent from the duty. The deponent seeks leave of Hon’ble court to produce the copy of the attendance register for aforesaid period at the time of hearing if needed the same.” In view of the above statement which has not been controverted by the petitioner despite service of a copy of the counter affidavit on the counsel for the petitioner on 21.4.2008, this Court will have no option but to hold that the action of the respondents in withholding the payment of salary for the period the petitioner on 3 account of his admitted absence from duty does not suffer from any error. That being so, this application is wholly misconceived and the same is accordingly dismissed. Rsh (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)