Smt. Lakshmi Kumari Srivastava vs The State of Bihar and Others

Narayan Roy, J.—Heard counsel for the parties. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner confines this application for payment of her due salary as enumerated in paragraph 10 of the writ application.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has not been paid her salary with effect from 22.9.1996, with effect from which date she has been promoted as Headmistress, till the date she superannuated.

Though a counter affidavit has been filed in this writ application no whisper has been made about this grievance of the petitioner.

Since the claim of the petitioner pertains to pecuniary benefit, this writ application is disposed of with a direction to the respondent authorities to pay her admissible salary for the post of Headmistress with effect from the date she was appointed as Headmistress till the date of her superannuation, if not already paid, within a period of three months from the date of receipt/ production of a copy of this order.

This order, however, will abide by the decision taken by the respondent authorities in any of the departmental proceedings, pending against the petitioner. This disposes of the writ application.