Ashok Kumar Singh @ Ashok Singh vs The State of Bihar

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2025 Supreme(Online)(Pat) 385

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.8488 of 2024 ======================================================
1. Ashok Kumar Singh @ Ashok Singh, S/o Devraj Singh, Resident of Village-
Madurana, P.O.- Hatta, District- Kaimur (Bhabua).
2. Harihar Ram, Son of Balrup Ram, Resident of Chhawani, P.O.- Bhabua, Ward No. 08, Behind Kachahari, P.S.- Bhabhua, District- Kaimur at Bhabhua.
3. Sant Ram @ Sant Kohar, Son of Ramakisun Kohar Resident of Village-
Pandey Bamhaur, P.O.- Bamhour Khas, District- Kaimur (Bhabhua).
4. Kalika Sharma, Son of Vikram Hjam, Resident of Village- Awariyan, P.O.-
Awariyan, P.S.- Kudra, District- Kaimur (Bhabhua).
5. Banarasi Ram @ Banarasi Kohar, Son of Bachani Kohar Resident of Village- Manihari, P.O- Manihari, District- Kaimur (Bhabhua).
6. Basant Ram @ Basant Koharr Son of Ramkisun Kohar Resident of Village-
Pandey Bamhour, P.O.- Bamhour Khas, District- Kaimur (Bhabhua).
7. Ramesh Prasad @ Ramesh Singh, Son of Ram Awadhesh Singh, Resident of Village- Chaukhanda Chitauli, P.O.- Samardiha, P.S.- Sasaram, District-
Rohtas.
8. Hanif Miya, Son of Husaini Miya, Resident of Village- Pahariya, P.O.-
Pahariya, P.S.- Bhagwanpur, District- Kaimur (Bhabhua).
9. Shivgovind Ram, Son of Kedar Ram, Resident of Village- Gangapur, P.S.-
Belaon, Baheri, P.S.- Nauhatta, District- Kaimur (Bhabhua).
10. Tadpan Ram, Son of Kareem Ram, Resident of Ambedakar Nagar, Ward No.
14, P.S.- Bhabhua, District- Kaimur (Bhabhua).
11. Ramnath Ram, Son of Late Jaishree Ram, Resident of Village and P.O.-
Mamrejpur, P.S.- Chenari, District- Rohtas.
12. Dulari Devi, Wife of Devnath Ram, Resident of Village- Miun, Sukharipur, P.S.- Sonhan, District- Kaimur at Bhabhua.
... ... Petitioner/s Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Water Resources Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Engineer-in-Chief, Water Resources Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
3. The Chief Engineer, Water Resources Department, Kaimur Division, Kaimur (Bhabhua).
4. The Executive Engineer, Irrigation Department, Mohnia, Kaimur.
5. The Deputy Collector, Revenue Division, Mohania, District- Kaimur.
6. The Deputy Collector, Sone Canal Revenue Division, Water Resources Department, Ara (Bhojpur).
7. The Accountant General, Bihar, Patna.
... ... Respondent/s ======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ram Niwas Prasad, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Randhir Kumar, AC to SC- 18 For the AG, Bihar : Mr. Chaitanya Swaroop, Advocate ======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR

ORAL JUDGMENT

Date : 19-03-2025 Heard the parties.

2. The petitioners, who are either erstwhile Work Charged Employee or their dependents, who had been working under the Work Charged Establishment in the Department of Water Resources Department for more than a decade, have approached this Court seeking a direction upon the respondents to provide pension/family pension along with its arrears to them.

3. Mr. Ram Niwas Prasad, learned Advocate for the petitioners submits that the issue regarding the entitlement of the Work Charged Employee stood settled in the case of Mobina Khatoon Vs. The State of Bihar & Others, reported in 2019 (1) PLJR 1015 and other identical cases. He further contended that identically situated persons have approached this Court, whose cases have been disposed of with a direction to consider their grievance in view of the judgment rendered by the Full Bench of this Court in the case of Mobina Khatoon (supra).

4. Learned Advocate for the State submits that the petitioners have also filed detailed representation before the Executive Engineer, Sone Canal Revenue Division, Kaimur (Bhabhua).

5. Having considered the nature of the grievance and the contention of the respective parties, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition with a direction to the concerned respondents to verify the record and if it is found that the petitioners have worked in the Work Charged Establishment for more than ten years, the respondent shall take appropriate decision in terms of the judgment of the Full Bench of this Court in the case of Mobina Khatoon (supra) and ensure payment thereof at the earliest, preferably within a period of four months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.

6. With the aforesaid, the writ petition stands disposed of.

(Harish Kumar, J)

uday/-

AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date 20.03.2025 Transmission Date NA

Click Here to Read the rest of this document