IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.10709 of 2001 BANKESHWAR SHARMA Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 3 16.09.2008 Heard Learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. The petitioner who was a Junior Engineer having superannuated in December, 2000 came to this Court in August, 2001 with a claim for his salary for the periods February, 1999, March, 1999, July 1999 and February, 2000 which he has not been paid till his superannuation in December, 2007.. Mr. Banerjee fairly submits that respondents have prepared the pay bill for the months of February, 1999, March 1999, July 1999 and February 2000 but for a measly amount of Rs. 10170/- only and that too after making deductions for the salary of the months of June 1999, October, 1999, November 1999 and January 2000 which in fact had already been paid to the petitioner earlier as he was on duty for the said periods. Therefore, the petitioner has refused to accept the aforesaid amount. He next submits that petitioner was all along on duty even after February, 2000 till superannuation and has sought to rely upon Annexure-5 series to the rejoinder to the counter affidavit in support thereof. It is therefore, submitted that the respondents have wrongly averred in the counter affidavit of his unauthorised absence as the reason for denial of salary. Learned counsel for the State submitted that it was the petitioner who refused to accept the salary for the four months in - 2 - question despite being offered to him. It was next submitted that for reasons of unauthorized absence of the petitioner, the department even published a newspaper publication on 25.3.2001 (Annexure- E series) in Hindi daily ‘Hindustan’. There are no issues with regard to arrears of salary based on a controversy of pay scales requiring adjudication by a Court of law on interpretation of statutory provisions. The matter is one purely of facts. The petitioner is now a retired person. To relegate him quite simply to the remedy of Money Suit shall neither be efficacious nor expeditious. This Court, therefore noticing the disputed facts, considers it appropriate to direct the Secretary, Department of Water Resources, Government of Bihar to depute a Senior Class-I Officer at Secretariat level to verify the records of the case both as urged by the petitioner and on behalf of the State and after fixing a date of hearing with opportunity to both sides make his final recommendation to the Secretary of the department who shall then pass necessary orders thereupon including directions for payment, if any, found to be due to the petitioner in a time bound manner. The writ application is disposed with directions for complete compliance within a maximum period of five months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. pkj (Navin Sinha, J)