Disposed

Kailash Prasad Yadav v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Patna HC29 Apr 2014CWJC/4533/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Judicature at Patna exercised judicial discretion in a writ petition concerning family pension. Instead of ordering salary payment barred by delay, the Court directed authorities to compute the petitioner's wife's service from 23.05.1988 to determine her family pension.

What did the court decide?

Directed the District Education Officer to examine the claim for family pension by taking into account the service of the petitioner's wife from 23.05.1988 and pass an appropriate order.

Kailash Prasad Yadav Vs The State Of Bihar and… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Patna HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.4533 of 2014

¶2

====================================================== Kailash Prasad Yadav s/o Late Manik Chand Yadav, resident of Village + P.O. Hulas, P.S. Raghopur, District Supaul.

¶3

.... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1.The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Department of Education, Government of Bihar, Patna. 2.The Principal Secretary, Department of Education, Government of Bihar, Patna. 3.The Principal Secretarty, Minister of Finance, Government of Bihar, Patna. 4.The Director, Primary Education Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. 5.The Regional Deputy Director of Education, Koshi Division, Saharsa. 6.The District Education Officer, Supaul. 7.The District Education Officer, Madhepura. 8.The District Treasury Officer, Supaul. 9.The District Treasury Officer, Madhepura. 10.The District Programme Officer (Establishment), Supaul. 11.The District Programme Officer (Establishment), Madhepura. 12.The Block Education Officer, Raghopur, District Supaul. 13.The Block Education Officer, Singeshwar East, District Madhepura. 14.The Drawing & Disbursing Officer, Raghopur Block, District Supaul. 15.The Drawing & Disbursing Officer, Singeshwar Block, District Madhepura. 16.The Headmaster, Primary School, Gadaha Rampur, Block-Singeshwar East, District Madhepura. 17.The Headmaster, Banar Jhula Upgraded Middle School, Hulas Anchal Raghopur, District Supaul. .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Amrit Abhijat, Adv For the Respondent/s : Mr. GP13- Nasim Yahya ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MIHIR KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER

¶4

2 29-04-2014 Heard learned counsel for the parties as with regard to the following reliefs prayed in this writ application:-

¶5

"(a) To issue a writ in the nature of Mandamus commanding and directing the Respondents in particular Respondent no. 5, the

¶6

Patna High Court CWJC No.4533 of 2014 (2) dt.29-04-2014

¶7

¶8

Regional Deputy Director of Education, Saharsa to make payment of the salary of Late Bibha Devi, the wife of the petitioner for the period from 01.10.1988 to 18.05.1989 while she was working as Assistant Teacher in Primary School, Gadaha Rampur Circle, Singheshwar East, District Madhepura in compliance of letter no. 1602 dated 24.07.2012 issued from the level of District Programme Officer (Establishment), Supaul to Respondent no. 11, the District Programme Officer (Establishment), Madhepura.

¶9

(b) To issue a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing the Respondents to reckon service of petitioner with effect from 23.05.88 and to grant her increment from this date only in order to fix family pension of petitioner beside making payment of balance amount on correct computation of increment from the 23.05.88, the original date of appointment."

¶10

Though this Court is satisfied that the stand taken by the respondents in the counter affidavit as with regard to prayer no. 1(A) that the petitioner will not be entitled for payment of salary of her wife for

¶11

Patna High Court CWJC No.4533 of 2014 (2) dt.29-04-2014

¶12

¶13

the period from 01.10.1988 to 18.05.1989, both on account of delay of more than 25 years in moving this Court as also on account of the fact that the wife of the petitioner has not worked in the concerned period, this Court would still direct the authorities to consider the prayer no. 1(B), wherein, all that the petitioner's wife appointment having been not terminated w.e.f 23.05.1988, at least she will be entitled for computation of her service from 23.05.1988 so that the benefit of family pension may ennure to the petitioner.

¶14

That being so, this application is disposed of with a direction to the concerned District Education Officer to examine only the limited claim of the petitioner for grant of family pension or enhancement thereof by taking into account the service of the wife of the petitioner from 23.05.1988 and pass an appropriate order strictly in accordance with law.

¶15

(Mihir Kumar Jha, J)

¶16

Ranjan/-

Kailash Prasad Yadav v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kailash Prasad Yadav v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ram Lochan Singh and Ors. Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Dr. Nitendra Prasad Sinha Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Kumud Kumari Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Reena Kumari Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Bideshwar Nayak Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Baikuntha Kumar Pathak Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.