IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.1388 of 2009 Dhanmatiya Devi, wife of Late Chandeshwar Rai . Versus The State Of Bihar & Ors . ----------- 2. 05.07.2011 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Counsel for the State. The writ petition was originally filed seeking the relief of regularisation for having worked as Evajee Chaukidar questioning the report of the three men committee as directed by this Court, refusing to regularize his services. The original petitioner is stated to have been deceased during pendency of the writ application on 8.1.2010. The claim for regularisation being a personal cause of action has automatically come to an end after his death. I.A. No. 4334 of 2011 has been filed by his widow for substitution. The writ application also raises a claim for arrears of salary for the period January 1991 to December 1996. Since that part of the claim has financial implications for the family of the deceased, after hearing Counsel for the parties the I.A. application is allowed. The widow is permitted to be substituted in placed of the deceased petitioner. The petitioner contends that before the three men committee the deceased had produced documentary evidence for having worked as Evajee Chaukidar during the aforesaid period based on the instructions of the Officer Incharge concerned. Dealing with paragraph 17 of the writ application the respondents in paragraph 12 of their counter affidavit do not answer much less deny the assertion. Whether the deceased had actually discharged duties during that period and whether there was direction of the officer Incharge concerned to do so are all questions of fact. If the deceased had actually discharged duties providing security in the village, that is an aspect which cannot be brushed aside so lightly to hold that he performed duties without any authorization so as to deny him the wages. The nature of the claim of having provided security to the villagers to enable them to sleep in peace distinguishes the case from a simple claim for arrears of salary in an illegal or irregular appointment. Considering the changed circumstances now that whatever the widow may receive shall bring succour to her, the Court considers it proper to direct that the respondent no. 5 shall consider the claim of the substituted petitioner to that limited extent. The petitioner is expected to file an application limited to documentary proof for discharge of duties during the period concerned under the direction of the Officer Incharge. Keeping in mind that it is the widow pursuing the matter now, the Court expects that the District Magistrate shall act reasonably and prudently and shall also seek a report from the Officer Incharge rather than act hyper technically on the application of the widow who has limited resources both in terms of information and monetarily. Let the District Magistrate then dispose of the claim within a maximum period of four months from the date of receipt and/or production of a copy of this order before him. It is expected that if the District Magistrate find justification in the claim of the petitioner or any part of the claim necessary consequential orders along with legitimate arrears shall be made available to the petitioner within the same period. The writ application stands disposed. Snkumar/- (Navin Sinha,J.)