The court directed the administrative verification of unpaid stipend claims through the Treasury Office when the claimant's bank records provide prima facie evidence of non-payment, overriding the respondent's argument that the claim is stale.

ORAL JUDGMENT

Heard learned Advocates for the respective parties.

2. The petitioner, who had completed her M.D. (Obst. & Gynae) at A.N. Magadh Medical College, Gaya from 20.06.2011 to 19.06.2014, is aggrieved with the action of the respondents in not allowing her to stipend for certain period, despite having successfully completed the course as a student of M.D.

3. Learned Advocate for the petitioner submitted that for the period in which the petitioner had pursued her course of M.D. (Obst. & Gynae), the total amount of stipend comes to Rs.11,25,907/-, however she has received only Rs.8,37,360/-. It is the specific contention of the petitioner that the remaining amount to the tune of Rs.2,88,547/- has not been paid to her. To fortify the aforesaid contention, the petitioner is further seeking a direction to get it verified from the Treasury Office as to whether all the bills submitted by the Principal, ANMMC have been passed by the concerned Treasury Officer, Gaya or not.

4. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondent No. 3. It is submitted that admittedly the petitioner joined to the Post Graduate course in Obstetrics and Gynecology on 20.06.2011 and completed the said course in June, 2014 from the ANMMC, Gaya. Initially a stipend/ scholarship was fixed for Rs.25,000/- per month but subsequently it was revised to Rs.30,000/- vide resolution dated 03.07.2022. The petitioner was regularly paid the requisite stipend/scholarship but after enhancement of stipend from 03.07.2012 arrears of seven months of stipends/scholarship amounting to Rs.35000/- could not be paid to the petitioner and the same shall be paid in a short period of time. The concerned respondent categorically denied that there is any due amount, much less of Rs.2,88,547/- for the stipend/scholarship. Moreover, the petitioner passed her course in the year 2014 and [[IMG_1]] after passing of seven years, she is making stale claim, is the contention of learned Advocate for the State.

5. Having considered the materials available on record and taking note of the submissions advanced by the learned Advocate for the petitioner, especially the copies of the bills which have been brought on record by filing counter affidavit, it clearly suggests that it is for the amount of Rs.8,37360/- and the remaining bill amounting to Rs.2,88,547/- is/or not brought on record. The petitioner has shown her bonafide by producing the entire bank account for the afore noted period, which also finds substance in her submission.

6. In view of the aforesaid facts, this Court deems it apt and proper to direct the concerned respondents to get the contention of the petitioner verified at the level of the Treasury Officer, Gaya as to whether all the bills to the tune of Rs.11,25,907/- have been honoured or passed by him or not. In case any bill has not been cleared, the same be informed to the concerned Superintendent of the ANMMC. In case it is found that any of the bill(s) has not been honoured by the Treasury Officer and the money has been returned to the concerned College, in such circumstances it is expected that the same shall be paid to the petitioner. [[IMG_2]]

7. The entire exercise must be completed preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.

8. The writ petition stands disposed.