SUDAMA DEVI Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) We have heard Mr. Nityanand Mishra, learned counsel, appearing for the petitioner, and Mr. Anjani Kumar, learned Additional Advocate General, appearing for the State respondents.

(2.) The controversy, in this writ petition, has arisen following the superannuation of the petitioner on 31.12.1990. The petitioner, while serving as A.N.M., under the Incharge Medical Officer, Sadar Block, Saharsa, was superannuated on 31.12.1990. The petitioner, claiming the said superannuation as illegal, challenged her superannuation by making a writ petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, which gave rise to CWJC No. 3882 of 1991. In the said writ proceeding, the service book, GPF pass book and educational certificates of the petitioner were handed over to the learned Government Counsel. The petitioner, upon disposal of the said writ petition, approached the State respondents for payment of her retiral benefits and, on non -payment of the retiral benefits of the petitioner, the petitioner has filed this writ petition.

(3.) Mr. Nityanand Mishra, learned Counsel, submits that the original service book, GPF Pass Book and education certificates of the petitioner, which were called for by the learned Government Advocate, in connection with CWJC No. 3882 of 1991, were never returned to respondent No. 6, Civil Surgeon, Saharsa, and, on several occasions, i.e. on 14.05.1996, 10.08.1996, 25.08.2005 and 28.01.2010, respondent No. 6 made correspondence with the office of the learned Advocate General, Bihar, regarding their omission to return the original service book, GPF Pass Book and education certificates of the petitioner stating therein clearly that due to absence of the aforesaid documents, he was unable to pay the retiral dues of the petitioner. It is further submitted by Mr. Mishra, learned Counsel, that when the original documents of the petitioner were not returned to the office of the respondent No. 6, respondent No. 6 informed, vide letter No. 1241, dated 16.04.2011, the Director -in -Chief, Health Services, Bihar, Patna, regarding the factum of omission to return to him the original documents of the petitioner and thereby disabling him to pay to the petitioner her legitimate retiral benefits.