IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.6139 of 2008 Dr.(Prof.) Sabra Ahmad, W/o Late Dr. Mushtaque Ahmad, a resident of Mohalla – Mithanpura, Opp. Masjid, P.O. – Ramna, P.S. – Mithanpura, District – Muzaffarpur………………. Petitioner Versus 1. The B.R.A. Bihar University through its Registrar having office at University Campus, Muzaffarpur. 2. The Vice Chancellor, the B.R.A. Bihar University, Muzaffarpur. 3. The Finance Officer, the B.R.A. Bihar University, Muzaffarpur. …………… Respondents ---------------------------------- 11 09.11.2011 Heard Sri A.B. Ojha, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Harendra Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel appearing on behalf of all the respondents. The husband of the petitioner had retired on 31.08.1994 and thereafter he died on 24.06.2003. The husband of the petitioner was ‘Reader- Urdu’, in Jamai Lal College, Hajipur under the B.R.A. Bihar University, Muzaffarpur. After the death of husband of the petitioner family pension was fixed but it was fixed incorrectly on lower scale as stated in the writ petition and amount of Rs. 65,141/- had fallen due. The petitioner has also claimed for revision of family pension in view of government circular no. 1300 dated 20.07.2001. The petitioner has categorically stated regarding her claim in paragraph no. 11 of the writ petition which are as follows:- (i) Arrear of family pension. (ii) difference of salary and pension payable during the life time of the husband of the petitioner by letter No. 1300 dt. 20.7.01. (iii) Interim relief 1.1.83 to 31.12.85. (iv) Differed D.A. 1.4.84 to 31.12.89. (v) Arrear of U.G.C. scale 1986-89 Interest has also been claimed on delayed payment. 2 The writ petition was filed in the year 2008 for the aforesaid reliefs and thereafter number of orders were passed. In this case earlier a show cause was filed by Vice- Chancellor and Registrar of the University wherein specific statement was made that a separate counter affidavit has also been filed. However, on perusal of the record it transpires that no such counter affidavit was filed. In this case in the year 2011 a counter affidavit was filed on 13th October, 2011 and now a plea has been taken by the University that certain documents are required to be supplied by the petitioner and due to that reason the grievances of the petitioner have not been redressed till date. In this case since incorrect statement was made earlier in the show cause, the respondent / University by way of filing supplementary counter affidavit has tried to clarify that due to inadvertence earlier in the show cause it was mentioned that separate counter affidavit was filed. Be that as it may, fact remains that though the writ petition was filed in the year 2008 till date no comprehensive counter affidavit has been filed and on one or the other pretext the University is just lingering the matter. In view of the facts and circumstances, the court is of the opinion that the writ petition may not be kept pending for indefinite period and as such on the basis of averment made in the writ petition the same stands allowed. The respondents are directed to take steps to redress the grievances of the petitioner as stated above within a period of two months from the date of receipt / production of 3 a copy of this order. The writ petition stands allowed. It goes without saying that the petitioner shall be entitled to get admissible statutory interest on all the delayed payment. Praful ( Rakesh Kumar, J.)