IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CWJC NO.1581 OF 2008
DEOPATI DEVI
VERSUS
THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS
**********
5 06/04/2011 The petitioner who is the widow of Late Arjun
Prasad has prayed for quashing of the order of recovery
as contained in Annexure-4.
A stand has been taken on behalf of the State
that 44 odds lakhs of rupees was paid to the husband of
the petitioner by way of advance against certain schemes.
It has also been stated that reminder was given to the
husband of the petitioner who was working as Junior
Engineer for recovery of the said amount.
This Court finds the counter affidavit vague,
inasmuch, as the reminders purportedly issued have not
been annexed, the Executive Engineer, who would have
been the Incharge of the work has not come forward to
say anything in this matter, the year and time of the
scheme has not been mentioned, it is also not stated as
to whether the work was completed and to what extent
and who was the Incharge of the schemes in question. On
such vague allegations, it is not possible for this Court to
uphold the order as contained in Annexure-4.
Counsel for the State will seek further
2
instructions in the matter and file supplementary counter
affidavit within a period of four weeks from today.
List this case after four weeks in the same
position.
Anand ( Sheema Ali Khan, J. )