Patna High Court - Orders
Shail Kumari Kuer vs Bihar State Road Transport Corporation ... on 3 September, 2014
Author: Ajay Kumar Tripathi
Bench: Ajay Kumar Tripathi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.15289 of 2013
======================================================
1. Shail Kumari Kuer Wife Of Late Lalan Singh Resident Of Village-
Gopiganj, P.O. Karnaul, P.S. Sahebganj, District- Muzaffarpur
.... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. Bihar State Road Transport Corporation, Pariwahan Bhawan, Birchand
Patel Path, Patna Through The Managing Director
2. The Managing Director, Bihar State Road Transport Corporation,
Parivahan Bhawan, Birchand Patel Path, Patna
3. The Divisional Manager, Bihar State Road Transport Corporation,
Darbhanga
4. The Divisional Manager, Bihar State Road Transport Corporation,
Ranchi
.... .... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Anil Kumar
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Prabhat Kumar Verma, Sr. Advocate
Mr Dhruba Mukherjee
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI
ORAL ORDER
10 03-09-2014Heard counsel for the petitioner and counsel for the BSRTC as well as counsel for Jharkhand State.
From perusal of the counter affidavit of Jharkhand State as well as BSRTC, it is evident that the husband of the petitioner worked for only 13 months prior to his death in an accident on 18.2.1994. If that is so then prayer of the petitioner for payment of family pension and other benefits is a misplaced kind of expectation to have because the husband of the petitioner had not rendered sufficient length of service for payment of any other benefits. However, if there is any deduction etc. made during the period of 13 months, the respondent BSRTC people Patna High Court CWJC No.15289 of 2013 (10) dt.03-09-2014 2/2 have already made communication with the Jharkhand State and demanded details of service history. The Jharkhand State will provide the same. Whatever entitlement emerges from the same will be considered by the authorities. No decisive order in favour of the petitioner can be passed for any other relief which she has made in the present writ application.
In view of the above factual position, which is evident from the counter affidavits, the writ application stands disposed of in terms of above.
(Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J) sk U