Research › Search › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

2003 DIGILAW 119 (PAT)

Indra Maya Devi v. State Of Bihar

2003-01-28

CHANDRAMAULI KR.PRASAD

body2003
Judgment 1. This application has been filed for quashing the order dated 9.11.2000 passed by the respondent Bihar Inter University Board whereby the prayer made by the petitioner for appointment on compassionate ground has been rejected. Further paryer of the petitioner is for payment of arrears of salary due to her husband in the regular scale of pay. 2. Short facts giving rise to the present application are that the petitioners husband Mit Narayan Kumar was appointed on daily wages at the rate of Rs. 10/- per day for three months by order dated 28.10.1981 (Annexure-1). By order dated 30.11.1988 (Annexure-1/A), it was decided that the service of the petitioners husband shall be regularised after the two posts of peons are sanctioned/revived by the State Government. Later on, by order dated 3.7.1991 (Annexure-4), the Office Order dated 30.11.1988 (Annexure-1/A) was cancelled and it was decided that the petitioner shall get salary in the scale of Rs. 350-455/-. Petitioners husband challenged the same by filing C.W.J.C. No. 4851 of 1991 (Mita Narayan Kunwar V/s. Bihar lnter University Board & Ors.). In the meanwhile, it seems that the petitioners husband died and the petitioner herein who happens to be his widow was substituted in his place. However, when the matter was taken up, the petitioner did not challenge the said order but pressed the application only for the payment of arrears of remuneration. By order dated 28.1.1999 (Annexure-5), liberty was given to the petitioner to file representation and a consequential direction was given to the Bihar Inter University Board to dispose of the said representation by reasoned order within three months from the date of its filing. It was further directed that in case it is found that the petitioner is entitled for any amount, same be paid to her within a period of two months from the date of the order upon the representation. 3. It seems that the petitioner was not paid amount as claimed by her and aggrieved by the same, she preferred C.W.J.C. No. 8586 of 2000 (Indramaya Devi V/s. State of Bihar & Ors.), interalia, praying to consider her case for appointment on compassionate ground and also to pay arrears of due salary of her husband. 3. It seems that the petitioner was not paid amount as claimed by her and aggrieved by the same, she preferred C.W.J.C. No. 8586 of 2000 (Indramaya Devi V/s. State of Bihar & Ors.), interalia, praying to consider her case for appointment on compassionate ground and also to pay arrears of due salary of her husband. By order dated 5.9.2000 (Annexure-7), this Court directed the respondents to consider the claim of the petitioner for appointment on compassionate ground within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of the said order. As regards the claim of the arrears of salary, respondents were directed to examine the same and pay to the petitioner the dues, if any, of the deceased employee within two weeks. In the light of the aforesaid order, the respondent Bihar Inter University Board examined the claim of the petitioner and held that the amount due to the tune of Rs. 27,692/- has already been paid and her prayer for appointment on compassionate ground is not fit to be acceded to as her husband was not regular employee and in fact, a daily wage employee. 4. Mr. R. K. Pathak, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, submits that the petitioners husband was appointed on daily wages as back as on 28.10.1981 and in that view of the matter, he ought to have been regularised in service and for the purpose of salary and appointment on compassionate ground, it shall be deemed that her husband was a regular employee. It is relevant here to state that by order dated 30.11.1988, a decision was taken to regularize the services of the petitioners husband on sanction/revival of the two posts of the peons but the said order was rescinded by order dated 3.7.1991 and although the petitioner made a challenge to the same in C.W.J.C. No. 4851 of 1991, but ultimately, gave up the same. Petitioners husband died on 15.10.1996 and in that view of the matter, the prayer made by the petitioner that her husband shall be deemed to have been regularised in service, cannot be accepted. Once it is held so, the petitioners husband being a daily wage employee, remuneration on account thereof has already been paid. Further the dependent of a daily wage employee is not entitled to be given appointment on compassionate ground. Once it is held so, the petitioners husband being a daily wage employee, remuneration on account thereof has already been paid. Further the dependent of a daily wage employee is not entitled to be given appointment on compassionate ground. In that view of the matter, the decision taken by the respondents not to give to the petitioner appointment on compassionate ground, cannot be faulted. 5. There is yet another impediment in the way of the petitioner. The order impugned has been passed in pursuance of the order of this Court as back as on 9.11.2000. Petitioner has chosen to file this writ application on 27.1.2003. Thus, the writ application suffers from delay and laches also. 6. I do not find any merit in the application and it is dismissed accordingly.