AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
This is a matter in which the Appellant, the State of Bihar could be saddled with costs for not having filed a counter-affidavit in the writ petition. The Court will refer this aspect subsequently.
The order on the writ petition as it stands gives a direction to the State of Bihar through the Commissioner-cum-Sec-retary, Human Resources Development to take all steps for sanctioning payment of arrears of salary to the employees of Maithili Academy, Sheopuri, Patna.
In the order ;on the writ petition there is reference to counter-affidavits filed on behalf of the State. Here the learned Court committed an error as the State had not filed a counter-affidavit. There is nothing on record of the pleadings on the writ petition that a defence on behalf of the State had been placed.
Today it is contended by learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the State Mr. S.S. Naiyer Hussain, G.P. 2, Senior Advocate, assisted by Dilip Kumar, J.C. to G.P. 5 that in so far as the Academy is concerned, this is a registered society. The employees are employees of the registered society an incorporated body. Of any salary not paid may be considered as a complaint before the Registrar, Co-operative Societies and not as a direction of the Court to the State as it would virtually amount to the salary being paid by the State of Bihar.
This aspect could not be considered because a counter-affidavit on behalf of the State had not been filed and it is desired that the Appellate Division may consider this submission for which purpose the state will pay costs. The counter-affidavit which was on the record was of the Academy and it was misunderstood as if it was the counter-affidavit of the State.
The State Respondent cannot be absolved from having this error committed as they never put their defence on record of the writ petition. For this the State is penalised for depositing cost of Rs. 2,500/- Into the account of Bihar State Legal Services Authority.
No one appeared on behalf of the Respondents.
At the time of admission on 9 April 1997, the operation of the order on the writ petition had been stayed. The stay order of 9 April 1997 is made absolute.
The appeal is allowed.