IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA MJC No.2853 of 2011 Bijay Kumar Singh Versus The State Of Bihar & Ors -----------
3. 16.11.2011 The direction of the Court was to the State
of Bihar for implementation by payment of the
legitimate pensionary dues. The direction was not to
forward papers to the office of the Accountant
General only. The obligation was of the State to
ensure that the order of the Court is complied.
Counsel for the State from the show cause
at Paragraph-12 submits that now it was the
Accountant General who was not acting in terms of
the direction of the Court.
On 12.10.2011 the Court had observed
that it was not satisfied with the statement of the
opposite parties in defence for non compliance.
Today counsel for the State reiterates the
submission that the once the State acknowledged
the claim, the responsibility now lies with the
Accountant General. But there is no specific
submission or stand that the Accountant General
had been informed for the need of compliance.
Much that the Court would have disliked
directing personal appearance, the order being
passed to that effect is more in exasperation when
the Court is feeling itself helpless to render justice to
the citizen because of official apathy.
Let the opposite party no. 4 and the
Accountant General now appear in person on the
next date. The order be brought to the attention of
the Accountant General by Respondent no. 4.
List at the same position on the 30th of
P. Kumar ( Navin Sinha, J.)