Take notes as you read a judgment using our Virtual Legal Assistant and get email alerts whenever a new judgment matches your query (Query Alert Service). Try out our Premium Member services -- Free for one month.\n\nPatna High Court\nM/S Dna Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd vs The State Of Bihar on 12 December, 2022          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA\n                    Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.21419 of 2019\n     ======================================================\n     M/s DNA Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Head office- G-11, Sector-11, Noida\n     U.P., Local office at AT-1, Murlidhar Apartment, Murli Path, Bailey\n     Road, P.O.- Danapur Cantt, P.S.- Rupaspur, District- Patna- 801503\n     through its project Manager Cum Authorized Signatory, Mohan Kumar\n     aged about 50 years Male, Son of Sukhdeo Roy.\n\n                                                               ... ... Petitioner/s\n                                       Versus\n\n\n1.   The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary Public Health\n     Engineering Department, Vishveswaraiya Bhawan, Patna.\n2.   The Engineer-in-Chief Cum Special Secretary, Public health\n     Engineering Department, Vishveswaraiya Bhawan, Patna.\n3.   The Chief Engineer, Public Health Engineering Department, Patna.\n4.   The Superintendent Engineer, Public Health Engineering Circle Ara.\n5.   The Executive Engineer, Public Health Division, Shahpur, Ara.\n6.   The Assistant Engineer, Public Health Division, Shahpur, Ara.\n7.   The Junior Engineer, Public Health Division, Shahpur, Ara.\n8.   The District Magistrate, Bhojpur.\n9.   The Circle Officer, Shahpur, Bhojpur.\n10. Manoj Kumar Mishra, Son of Bisheshwar Mishra, Care Taker,\n     Karnamepur, Shahpur, Ara.\n\n                                                             ... ... Respondent/s\n     ======================================================\n     Appearance :\n     For the Petitioner/s   :      Mr. Lakshmi Kant Sharma, Advocate\n                                   Mr. Rakesh Kumar Sharma, Advocate\n                                   Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Advocate\n     For the Respondent/s :        Mr. Arvind Ujjwal, SC-4\n     ======================================================\n Patna High Court CWJC No.21419 of 2019 dt.12-12-2022\n                                           2/10\n\n\n\n\n       CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE\n                  and\n                  HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY\n       ORAL JUDGMENT\n       (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE)\n\n\n         Date : 12-12-2022\n\n                        Petitioner has prayed for the following relief(s):-\n\n                            "That this is an application for issuance of appropriate\n                            writ/ writs, order/ orders, Direction/ directions\n                            commanding the respondent authorities for making\n                            payment of outstanding due amount of Rs. 4856000/-\n                            (Rupees Forty eight lacs fifty six thousand only) to the\n                            petitioner against execution of Arsenic/fluoride free\n                            Rural Piped water supply Scheme pursuant to\n                            agreement dated 03.06.2008 with admissible interest.\n                                 Petitioner further seeks any other relief/reliefs for\n                            which he is found entitled in the eye of law and in the\n                            facts and circumstances of the present case."\n\n                      Learned counsel for the petitioner prays that the instant\n\n         petition be disposed of exactly in the same terms as contained in\n\n         judgment dated 14.09.2022 passed by this Court in CWJC\n\n         No.13024 of 2022, titled as M/s. Raghoji House of Distribution\n\n         Vs. The State of Bihar & Ors.\n\n                      No objection to such prayer being allowed.\n\n                      In the instant case, allegedly, petitioner is not being\n\n         paid the outstanding dues of Rs. 4856000/- (Rupees Forty eight\n\n         lacs fifty six thousand only) submitted by him by the respondents\n Patna High Court CWJC No.21419 of 2019 dt.12-12-2022\n                                           3/10\n\n\n\n\n         together with interest thereon.\n\n                      Petitioner made repeated requests to the authorities\n\n         concerned.\n\n                      There is no response to the petitioner's request.\n\n                      The dispute still survives and petitioner's request for\n\n         clearance of dues remains pending.\n\n                      Well, without going into the merits of the issues, on all\n\n         counts, the dispute could have been resolved in terms of the Bihar\n\n         State Litigation Policy, 2011.\n\n                      In M/s. Raghoji House of Distribution (Supra), We\n\n         had passed the following observations and directions:-\n\n                         "5. We also notice that even in those cases where the\n                 parties are governed by the Dispute Resolution Mechanism,\n                 provided in terms of the agreement(s) or statutes, parties are\n                 forced to litigate endlessly before different legal foras, be it\n                 this Court or the statutory Tribunals.\n                         6. We see no reason as to why the respondent State\n                 does not apply and take recourse to the mechanism provided\n                 under its own policy termed as the "Bihar State Litigation\n                 Policy,2011". We also see no reason as to why the\n                 respondent State does not resort to the provisions of Section\n                 89 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.\n                         7. Unfortunately, parties are made to run from pillar\n                 to post, and as we have noticed, it is only where the officers\n                 of the State are interested, be it for whatever reason and\n                 consideration, that case of few favoured individuals are\n                 settled and issues resolved, leaving the significant majority\n                 to litigate.\n                         8. The instant case, in our considered view, is the best\n                 example where the officers and the officials of the State are\n                 found to have been lacking in adhering to the litigation\n                 policy, even worse, responding to the petitioner's request\n                 made in terms of written communications. For the purposes\n                 of setting up a stall as part of Krishi Pradarshani, during the\n                 Sonepur Mela, petitioner's services were availed. He\n Patna High Court CWJC No.21419 of 2019 dt.12-12-2022\n                                           4/10\n\n\n\n\n                 erected a tent and submitted his bill for which only part\n                 payment was released.\n                         9. Petitioner claims the outstanding amount to be\n                 Rs.21,67,056. The District Agriculture Officer, Saran,\n                 Chapra, the concerned officer, has already forwarded\n                 favourably, request for release of the amount, to the higher\n                 authorities. This is vide communication dated 17.08.2019.\n                 Unfortunately, the superior officers slept over the matter and\n                 despite petitioner's repeated request and reminders, and the\n                 last one being on 01.07.2022 (Annexure-3), no action stands\n                 taken, forcing initiation of current proceedings.\n                         10. The Litigation Policy does state that-\n                     "1.1 (b) Responsible litigant means:\n                     a. That litigation will not be resorted to for the sake\n                  of litigating."...\n\n                      ... "1.2 This Policy is also based on the recognition\n                  that it is the responsibility of the Government to protect\n                  the rights of the citizens, to respect fundamental rights\n                  and that those in charge of the conduct of Government\n                  litigation should never forget these basic principles."\n\n                    "1.3 The twin underlying objective of this Policy is\n                  to reduce pressure on the overloaded judiciary and\n                  expedite dispensation of justice..."\n\n                     "IV.        PREVENTION/CONTROL                    OF\n                  AVOIDABLE LITIGATION\n                                                      A\n                     4.A Setting up Grievance Redressal System\n                     4.A ( 1). Very often the major causes of litigation\n                  involving the State Government are from arbitrariness\n                  in decision making or non application of mind or non-\n                  response/ improper response to representations made\n                  by employees, including retired employees/ parties. It\n                  is seen that in most cases in respect of service matters\n                  the cause of action arises out of relief not being given\n                  as per the Rules, Government instructions or policy\n                  decisions as are in force. It is also seen that in most\n                  cases before the matter reaches the Court the affected\n                  party undeservedly spends a lot of his time and effort\n                  over redressal of his grievance through normal\n                  administrative channels. In this situation all\n                  Departments of the State Government shall set up\n                  effective Grievance Redressal Committees in order to\n                  pre-empt a large number of avoidable litigation.\n Patna High Court CWJC No.21419 of 2019 dt.12-12-2022\n                                           5/10\n                      4. A(2). It shall be mandatory for employees,\n                  including those retired, to seek redressal, at the first\n                  instance, through this system before approaching the\n                  Courts.\n                      4. A(3). A time limit of eight weeks or so may be\n                  fixed for deciding such representations.\n                      4. A(4). Such Grievance Redressal Committees shall\n                  be set up in each Department at the State Level,\n                  District Level and Sub-Divisional Level and each of\n                  them shall have a Grievance Cell. All cases and issues\n                  at the request of the aggrieved party shall be reviewed\n                  to redress genuine grievances.\n                      4. A(5) The Department Level Grievance Committee\n                  shall be headed by the Principal Secretary/ Secretary of\n                  the Department concerned and shall meet once a month\n                  to review the efficiency of the Grievance Redressal\n                  System in the Department. Similarly at the District and\n                  Sub-Divisional Level, the Committee shall be headed\n                  by the District Magistrate or Sub Divisional Officer, as\n                  the case may be. The District Sub Divisional Level\n                  Grievance Redressal Committees shall meet once every\n                  month on the first Tuesday of each month; if this is a\n                  holiday, the Committee will meet on the next working\n                  day excluding "Janata ka Darbar" days, i.e., Mondays\n                  and Thursdays. Where it is found that certain\n                  Government instructions require to be reviewed, it shall\n                  refer the same to the State Level Empowered\n                  Committee. As seniority matters are a major source of\n                  litigations these shall be resolved expeditiously by the\n                  Department and seniority lists should be updated,\n                  printed and published regularly."\n\n                    "4.B. Quick Action on Representations/ Legal\n                  Notices\n\n                     4.B(1). A legal notice is intended to alert the State to\n                  negotiate a just settlement or at least have the courtesy\n                  to tell the potential outsider why the claim is being\n                  resisted. Nowadays such notices have become a\n                  formality. When such a legal notice is served upon any\n                  Department asking for the relief the same should be\n                  decided expeditiously in accordance with the prevalent\n                  Rules/ Instructions and by a detailed speaking order.\n                  Timely response would avoid waste of public money\n                  and promote expeditious work in Court in cases which\n                  deserve to be attended to."\n Patna High Court CWJC No.21419 of 2019 dt.12-12-2022\n                                           6/10\n\n\n\n\n                                                       (Emphasis supplied)\n\n                     11. Though in relation to a Government employee, but\n                 in reference to the Litigation Policy, in LPA No.1322 of\n                 2018 titled as The District Manager, Bihar State Food\n                 and Civil Supplies Corporation Ltd. Begusarai v.\n                 Anuradha Devi & Ors. disposed of on 01.02.2022, we had\n                 issued the following directions:-\n\n                      "17. We notice that State has formulated a Litigation\n                  Policy with the avowed object of not only reducing\n                  litigation, saving avoidable cost on unproductive\n                  litigation, reducing avoidable load on judiciary with\n                  respect to Government induced litigation. This is in tune\n                  with the mandate of Article 39-A of the Constitution of\n                  India, obligating the State to promote equal justice and\n                  provide free legal aid. In fact, by virtue of the clauses of\n                  the State Litigation Policy, the State is under an\n                  obligation to take steps to reduce litigation, wherever\n                  possible. Now, if the employees are not paid their dues\n                  within time, obviously, they are left with no remedy but\n                  to rush to the Courts.\n                      18. Of late, litigation pertaining to employees of the\n                  State has increased more so on account of illegal actions.\n                  The action assailed is of mis-governance or avoidable\n                  omissions on the part of the Government. Why should\n                  the State force an employee/legal heir to litigate in a case\n                  where emoluments, which are undisputed, are not\n                  disbursed in time. An employee/legal heir has a\n                  constitutional right to receive the same within time, so\n                  also State is under a constitutional obligation and duty to\n                  disburse it within time.\n                      19. In the light of the aforesaid discussion, we\n                  dispose of the appeal in the following manner:-\n                        (a) The present Appeal stands dismissed upholding\n                   the the judgment and order dated 25.06.2018 passed by\n                   a learned Single Judge of this Court in CWJC\n                   No.11609 of 2014 titled as Anuradha Devi Versus\n                   The State of Bihar & Ors.\n                        (b) The appellant shall positively pay the entire\n                   amount in terms of the impugned judgment to the writ\n                   petitioner, namely Anuradha Devi, within a period of\n                   three weeks from today, failing which she shall be\n                   entitled to interest @ 12% per annum. Appellant shall\n                   ensure the same, else the amount of interest shall be\n                   recovered from his salary. Affidavit of compliance shall\n Patna High Court CWJC No.21419 of 2019 dt.12-12-2022\n                                           7/10\n\n\n\n\n                   be filed within two months from today.\n                        (c) Joint Registrar (List) shall ensure supply copy\n                   of this order to all concerned. For compliance, matter be\n                   placed before the Court on 05.05.2022.\n                        (d)      The Chief Secretary to the Government of\n                   Bihar, shall ensure providing a mechanism, enabling the\n                   employees to vent out their grievances of non-\n                   disbursement          of    due       and      admissible\n                   wages/salaries/emoluments. One such mechanism being\n                   of setting up a 'Web Portal' at the level of the Principal\n                   Secretary/ Secretary of the concerned Department(s),\n                   where      the       employees     can     lodge     their\n                   grievances/complaints. Such grievances/ complaints\n                   shall be processed and adequately responded to within a\n                   period of reasonable period. This would facilitate\n                   speedy redressal of genuine grievances and prevent\n                   unnecessary litigation, clogging the wheels of\n                   administration of justice. Such endeavour shall only be\n                   in the spirit of Litigation Policy, framed by the State\n                   Government. We see great advantage in the use of\n                   information and technology. Not only it would result\n                   into effective and efficient redressal of grievances, if\n                   any, but also improve efficiency in the affairs of\n                   governance of the State, further instilling confidence\n                   and trust amongst the employees.\n                        (e) Non disbursement of monetary benefits, except\n                   in the event of the dictum of law would entail\n                   consequences of recovery of the amount of interest from\n                   the delinquent officer incharge for such disbursement."\n                                                        (Emphasis supplied)\n\n                     12. In this view of the matter, we are constrained to\n                 dispose of the present petition with the following\n                 direction(s):-\n                 (a)    The Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, shall\n                        issue appropriate directions to the heads of all the\n                        concerned departments ensuring expeditious,\n                        consideration of the claims/counter claims set up by\n                        the parties, including that of the State; disposal of\n                        requests/representations; and disbursement of money\n                        undisputedly found due and payable;\n                 (b) The person empowered and authorized to take such a\n                        decision be directed to have the needful done within\n                        a reasonable period which normally, unless the laws\n                        otherwise prescribes, should not be more than six\n Patna High Court CWJC No.21419 of 2019 dt.12-12-2022\n                                           8/10\n\n\n\n\n                         months from the date of receipt of such claim;\n                 (c)     In the event of the authority concerned sitting over\n                         the matter or not taking any action, appropriate action\n                         be taken/proceedings initiated against such person;\n                 (d)     In so far as the instant case is concerned, Respondent\n                         No. 2, namely, the Principal Secretary, Agriculture\n                         Department, Government of Bihar, Patna, is directed\n                         to have the petitioner's case examined and ensure\n                         early decision and disbursement of petitioner's\n                         legitimate dues payable under the work order. This,\n                         positively be done within a period of two months\n                         from today.\n\n                        13. We may clarify that in the instant case, we have\n                 not adjudicated the claims on merits and leave it open for\n                 the authority concerned to take a decision in accordance\n                 with law."\n\n                       As mutually agreed, the instant petition stands disposed\n\n         of in terms of judgment passed by this Court in M/s. Raghoji\n\n         House of Distribution (Supra) and the directions contained\n\n         therein shall also govern the instant case mutatis mutandi, to the\n\n         extent possible.\n\n                       In so far as the instant case is concerned,\n\n                       (i) Respondent no. 5, namely, The Executive Engineer,\n\n         Public Health Division, Shahpur, Ara, is directed to have the\n\n         petitioner's case examined and ensure early decision and\n\n         disbursement of petitioner's legitimate dues payable, if any, under\n\n         the work order. As also consideration of all claims. This,\n\n         positively be done within a period of two months from today,\n Patna High Court CWJC No.21419 of 2019 dt.12-12-2022\n                                           9/10\n\n\n\n\n         failing which costs of Rs.5,000/- shall be paid to the petitioner to\n\n         be recovered from the personal salary of the officer concerned.\n\n                      (ii) Respondent No. 1, namely, the Principal Secretary\n\n         Public Health Engineering Department, Vishveswaraiya Bhawan,\n\n         Patna, shall ensure putting in place effective mechanism for\n\n         grievance redressal. This must also be done on a digital platform.\n\n         Also the general public be informed of availability and\n\n         functioning of such mechanism.\n\n                      (iii) Failure would result into initiation of proceedings\n\n         for having deliberately violated the order and consequential action\n\n         of stoppage of salary of the concerned officer.\n\n                      (iv) All issues, on merit, facts and law, are left open to\n\n         be decided by the decision making authority. However, such\n\n         decision has to be in compliance of all principles of natural\n\n         justice.\n\n                      (v) Liberty reserved to the parties to initiate a fresh\n\n         action, should the need so arise.\n\n                      (vi) Respondent no. 5, namely, The Executive Engineer,\n\n         Public Health Division, Shahpur, Ara, shall file an affidavit of\n\n         compliance of the order within a period of three months from\n\n         today and on failure, Registry shall place the file on the judicial\n\n         side.\n\n                      (vii) Shri Arvind Ujjwal, learned SC 4, appearing for\n              Patna High Court CWJC No.21419 of 2019 dt.12-12-2022\n                                                       10/10\n\n\n\n\n                      the Respondents, undertakes to immediately communicate a copy\n\n                      of this order, both to Respondent No. 1, namely, the Principal\n\n                      Secretary Public Health Engineering Department, Vishveswaraiya\n\n                      Bhawan, Patna, and Respondent no. 5, namely, The Executive\n\n                      Engineer, Public Health Division, Shahpur, Ara. This he shall do\n\n                      by all modes.\n\n                                     Writ petition stands disposed of with the aforesaid\n\n                      observations and directions.\n\n                                  Interlocutory Application(s), if any, shall stand disposed\n\n                      of.\n\n                                                   (Sanjay Karol, CJ)\n\n\n                                                   (Partha Sarthy, J)\n\navinash/Sujit\nAFR/NAFR\nCAV DATE\nUploading Date          14.12.2022\nTransmission Date