- (1.) THIS Letters Patent Appeal is preferred against the order dated 7.3.2013 passed in W.P.(S) No.1846 of 2010 allowing the writ petition and directing the appellant -State of Jharkhand to pay the arrears of salary of late Murari Prasad, husband of the respondent, with cost of Rs.5000/ -.
(2.) THE husband of the respondent, late Murari Prasad, was working as Superintending Engineer in PHED and retired as such on 30.11.2003 and subsequently died on 12.3.2005. While the said Murari Prasad, husband of the respondent, was in service, a departmental proceeding was initiated against him and he was put under suspension and subsequently a chargesheet was submitted against the husband of the respondent on 3.6.2002. The departmental proceeding was initiated, vide order dated 22.6.2002 and enquiry report was submitted on 19.9.2002 and the enquiry officer found late Murari Prasad not guilty. However, taking a different view, vide order dated 11.7.2003, the concerned authority imposed the punishment of censure. The husband of the respondent filed several representations for payment of salary but the authority did not consider the same. The husband of the respondent filed writ petition being C.W.J.C. No.12523 of 2003 and in the meantime he died on 12.3.2005 and the said writ petition was dismissed, vide order dated 15.9.2005, as no substitution petition was filed. Thereafter the respondent made several representations but the concerned authority did not consider the grievance of the respondent and then the respondent filed writ petition being W.P.(S) No. 1846 of 2010. The said writ petition was allowed on 7.3.2013 by quashing the order contained in memo no. 1724 dated 5.5.2004 and by directing the appellant to pay the arrears of salary to the respondent minus the amount of subsistence allowance already paid to the husband of the respondent during the period of suspension within two months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of that order. Learned Single Judge also directed the appellant to pay the cost of Rs.5000/ - to the respondent. Being aggrieved by allowing of the writ petition, the appellant -State has preferred this appeal.
(3.) WE have heard Mr. Sumir Prasad, learned S.C. I for the appellant -State of Jharkhand and Mr. Binod Kumar Dubey, learned counsel for the respondent.;