High Court Patna High Court - Orders

Devendra Nath Sharma vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 22 July, 2011

Patna High Court – Orders
Devendra Nath Sharma vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 22 July, 2011
               IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                         CWJC No.11661 of 2011
          Devendra Nath Sharma, Son of Late Chhathu Upadhyay,
          Resident of Village Sihauta Bangara, P.S. Maharajganj,
          District Siwan.
                    ...                    ...   Petitioner.
                                 Versus
     1.   The State Of Bihar
     2.   The District Magistrate, Siwan, District Siwan.
     3.   The Chief Engineer, Water Resources Department, Siwan,
          District Siwan.
     4.   The Superintending Engineer, Saran Canal Circle, Chapra.
     5.   The Executive Engineer, Saran Canal Division, Gandak
          Project, Maharajganj, District Siwan.
     6.   The Accountant General, Bihar, Bir Chand Patel Path,
          Patna.
                    ...                     ...  Respondents.
                              -----------

2. 22.7.2011. Heard Shri Sanjay Kumar Singh,

learned counsel for the petitioner, Shri

Parth Sharthi, learned S.C.10, who appears

on behalf of respondent nos.1 to 5 and Shri

Prabhat Ranjan, learned counsel appearing

on behalf of respondent no.6/Accountant

General.

The petitioner, who retired with

effect from 30.11.2008 as Amin from the

office of Executive Engineer, Saran Canal

Division, Gandak Project, Maharajganj,

District Siwan, has prayed for directing

the respondents to start paying pension.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits

that except pension, other retiral dues

have already been paid to the petitioner.
2

In paragraph-9 of the writ petition, a

specific averment has been made that during

the service period, petitioner’s service

was fully satisfactory and no charges or

show cause was ever made against him before

retirement. However, without any rhyme and

reason, the authority concerned has not

fixed his pension.

In view of the averment made in

paragraph-9 of the writ petition as well as

the fact that other retiral dues have

already been paid and the petitioner

retired in the year 2008, the court is of

the opinion that writ petition can be

allowed at this stage directing the

respondents to take immediate steps for

fixing final pension and start paying

pension to the petitioner. The respondent/

State authority are directed to immediately

issued sanction in respect of pension of

the petitioner within a period of six weeks

from the date of receipt/production of a

copy of this order. Court expects that

respondent no.6/Accountant General shall

issue authorization within a period of four

weeks from the date of receipt of sanction
3

from the State authority.

                   With         above     observation      and

        direction,        the      writ    petition     stands

        allowed.


N.H./                          ( Rakesh Kumar,J.)