Manoj Kumar vs The State Of Bihar
2021 Latest Caselaw 531 Patna

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                   Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.7938 of 2020
     ======================================================

1. Manoj Kumar, Sonof Arjun Prasad Singh, Resident of Naya Tola Naugachia, P.O.- Naugachia, P.s.- Naugachia, District- Bhagalpur, Pin Code- 853204.

2. Dhananjay Kumar Sharma, Son of Kasturi Prasad Sharma, Resident of village Parbatta, P.s.- Ismilepur, District- Bhagalpur.

3. Sarita Kumari, Wife of Rajeev Kumar Ranjan, Resident of village - Mil Tola, PS.- Naugachia, District- Bhagalpur.

4. Ajit Kumar Paswan, Son of Vivekanand Paswan, Resident of village Jhandapur, Ward No. 10, P.S.- Bihpur, District- Bhagalpur.

5. Rajeev Kumar Raman, Son of Naresh Das, Resident of village Sahu Parbatta, P.s.- Naugachia, District- Bhagalpur.

6. Rani Kumari, Wife of Ashik Kumar Nirala, Resident of village - Nagrah, P.S.- Naugachia, District- Bhagalpur.

7. Mukesh Kumar Rajak, Son of Banarsi, Resident of village Abhiya, Bazar, P.S.- gopalpur, District- Bhagalpur.

8. Rubi Kumari, Wife of Vivekanand Mandal, Resident of village Sadhua, P.S.-

Rangra Chowk, District- Bhagalpur.

9. Lucy Kumari, Daughter of Giro Ray, Resident of village Tetri, P.s.-

Naugachia, District- Bhagalpur.

10. Ranjana Kumari, Daughter of Arun Prasad Singh, Resident of village Pakra, P.S. Naugachia, District- Bhagalpur.

11. Punam Kumari, Daughter of Umesh Rajak, Resident of village Mahadhopur, P.S. Naugachia, District- Bhagalpur.

12. Kanchan Kumari, wife of Pradip Prasad Bhagat, Resident of village Dholbajja, P.S.- Kodwa (Dholbajja), District- Bhagalpur.

13. Md. Kaushar Ali, Son of Md. Idris Ali, Resident of Muslim Tola, Pakra, Ward No. 14, P.S.- Naugachia, District- Bhagalpur.

14. Mukesh Kumar, Son of Lakshman Das, Resident of village Kamalpur, P.S.-

Sazour, District- Bhagalpur.

15. Renu Kumari, wife of Mukesh Sharma, Resident of village Pakra, P.S.-

Naugachia, District- Bhagalpur.

16. Nilam Kumari, Wife of Rajeev Kumar, Resident of Bagri Tola Kadwa, P.S. -

Dholbajja, District- Bhagalpur.

17. Swati Kumari, wife of Akhilesh Kumar, Resident of Dharhara, P.S.-

Gopalpur, District- Bhagalpur.

18. Ashish Kumar, Son of Shukdeo Prasad Mandal, Resident of village Ashram Tola Kadwa, P.S.- Naugachia, district- Bhagalpur.

19. Anoj Sah, Son of Jaleshwar Sah, Resident of village Hario, P.s.- Bihpur, District- Bhagalpur.

20. Zarina Begum, wife of Md. Motibur Rahman, resident of Sakraili, P.S.-

Sakraili, district- Katihar.

Patna High Court CWJC No.7938 of 2020 dt.01-02-2021

21. Raj Kumari, Wife of Nitesh Kumar Singh, Resident of Village - Pakra, P.s.-

Naugachia, District- Bhagalpur.

22. Babita Kumari, wife of Milan Kumar, Resident of village - Pakra, P.S. Naugachia, District- Bhagalpur.

23. Sunita Kumari, wife of Balkeshwar Singh, Resident of village - Pakra, P.S. Naugachia, district- Bhagalpur.

24. Babita Kumari, wife of Sushil Kumar, Resident of village - Bobil, P.S.-

Beldor, District- Khagaria.

25. Brajesh Kumar Singh, Son of Surendra Prasad Singh, Resident of village

-Pakra, P.s. - Naugachia District- Bhagalpur.

26. Sushma Sinha, Wife of Umesh Prasad Singh, Resident of Moh. tola, P.s.-

Naugachia, District- Bhagalpur.

27. Bulbul Kumari, Wife of Subodh Prasad Sharma, Resident of village -

Sadhura, P.S.- gopalpur, District- Bhagalpur.

28. Sunita Kumari, Wife of Manjesh Kumar Rajak, Resident of Singhkund, P.s.-

Kharik, District- Bhagalpur.

29. Anita Kumari, wife of Sanjay Kumar Mandal, Resident of village -

Raghopur, P.S. Parbatta, District- Bhagalpur.

30. Munilal Singh, Son of Mahanand Prasad, Resident of village - Raza Babu Mandir Navin Nagar, Punama Pratap Nagar, P.S.- Dholgajja, District- Bhagalpur.

31. Gulshan Ara, Wife of Md. Shahid Akhtar, Resident of village - Dhrubganj P.s.- Kharik, District- Bhagalpur.

32. Luxmi Kumari, wife of Rajeev Kumar Paswan, Resident of village -

Jhandapur, P.S.- Bihpur, District- Bhagalpur.

33. Pooja Kumari, Wife of Bhibhakar Bharti, Resident of village - Naugachia, Ward No. 17, P.S.- Naugachia, District- Bhagalpur.

34. Bibi Sanower Khatun, Wife of Md. Shahid Karim, Resident of village -

Ujani, P.S. Naugachia, District- Bhagalpur.

35. Yogesh Kumar Yogi, Son of Late Nageshwar Harizan, Resident of village -

Bhawanipur Naya Tola, P.S.- Rangra Chowk, District- Bhagalpur.

36. Ruhi Khatoon, Daughter of Md. Kalimuddin, Resident of village - Kilaghat Sarai, P.S. - Tatarpur, District- Bhagalpur.

37. Rabindra Kumar Roy, Son of Sukdeo Roy, Resident of village Pakra, P.s.-

Naugachia, District- Bhagalpur.

38. Alpana Kumari, Wife of Dipak Roy, Resident of village - Pakra, P.S.-

Naugachia, District- Bhagalpur.

... ... Petitioner/s Versus

1. The State of Bihar, through the Additional Chief Secretary, Education Department, govt.of Bihar, patna.

2. The Director Primary Education, Government of Bihar, Patna.

3. The Regional Deputy Director of Education, Bhagalpur, At and P.O.- Patna High Court CWJC No.7938 of 2020 dt.01-02-2021

Bhagalpur.

4. The District Education Officer, Bhagalpur, At and PO- Bhagalpur.

5. The District Programme Officer (Establishment) Bhagalpur, At and PO -

Bhagalpur.

... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Sunil Kumar Singh For the Respondent/s : Mrs.Binita Singh (S.C. 28) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHAKRADHARI SHARAN SINGH ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 01-02-2021

The petitioners, 38 in number, have claimed that they

were appointed as Panchayat Teachers in the District of Bhagalpur

in different schools under different Panchayats. The Bihar

Panchayat Elementary Teachers (Employment and Service

Conditions) Rules, 2006 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Rules')

governed their appointments and service conditions. Rule 4 of the

said Rules required that the competent authority shall make

arrangements for training for a period of two years for such

teachers who were untrained at the time of their engagement. The

petitioners were sent for training, however, after considerable

delay. They participated in the training and passed the required

examination. Though they were appointed on different dates

ranging from 14.08.2010 to 10.05.2012, as is evident from the

statement made in paragraph 5 of the writ application, they have

been granted benefit of trained scale from the date of publication Patna High Court CWJC No.7938 of 2020 dt.01-02-2021

of result. It is the petitioners' case that they are entitled to trained

scale from the date of completion of their training and much

belated publication of result should not be the basis for

determination of date with effect from which they should be held

to be entitled to trained scale. The petitioners have relied upon a

decision of this Court dated 09.08.2019 passed in C.W.J.C. No.

16165 of 2019 (Kishor Kumar and Others v. The State of Bihar

and Others) wherein the Court has held as under:-

"If there is no dispute that the petitioners were sent for training in academic sessions 2013-15 and the course was completed in May, 2017, there is no reason to deny the benefit of trained scale to these petitioners with effect from May, 2017 when the course was completed as the petitioners have completed their training but for the reason best known to the respondents the examination was not held in time and the result was published belatedly along with the junior batch.

Considering the aforesaid, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the Director, Primary Education to consider the case of the petitioners and grant the benefit from the date of completion of training to the petitioners as the lapses on the part of the respondents cannot be a ground to deny the benefit of trained pay scale. It is now well settled that one cannot take advantage of his own wrong in defeating the genuine claim. Chief Justice Chhagla of Bombay High Court in the case of All India Groundnut Syndicate Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Bombay City: AIR 1954 Bom. 232 has Patna High Court CWJC No.7938 of 2020 dt.01-02-2021

occasion to settle the principle on the similar line there is judgment of the Apex Court in the case of State of Maharashtra Vs. Jagannath Achyut Karandikar: AIR 1989 SC 1133. The respondents have to take decision granting benefit of trained scale to the petitioners with effect from the date of completion of their training i.e. May, 2017. Necessary decision in this regard with all consequential monetary benefits must be taken by the Director, Secondary Education within a period of sixty days from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.

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

2. Placing reliance on the aforesaid decision of this

Court, the petitioners have sought for quashing of letter issued

vide Memo No. 52 dated 06.01.2020 by the District Programme

Officer (Establishment) Bhagalpur (Respondent no. 5) to the

extent the same relates to these petitioners whereby a decision has

been taken to grant grade pay to the teachers (Panchayat

Teacher/Prakhand Teacher) who were trained teachers of D. L. Ed.

(O.D.L.) Session 2013-15 (B) from the date of declaration of the

result i.e. 31.03.2019. It is the petitioners' case that they are

entitled for the grade pay with effect from May, 2017. They are

accordingly seeking a direction to the respondent nos. 2 and 5 to

grant them benefit of grade pay with effect from successful

completion of the training i.e. May, 2017. They are claiming their Patna High Court CWJC No.7938 of 2020 dt.01-02-2021

benefits strictly in terms of the judgment and order of this Court

dated 09.08.2019 in case of Kishor Kumar and Others (supra).

3. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the

State of Bihar. No averment made in the writ application has been

denied in the counter affidavit. It is thus an undisputed fact that

the petitioners were sent for training in the Session 2013-15 (B)

for the course of Diploma in Elementary Education in accordance

with the statutory requirement under Rule 4 of the Rules. Specific

assertion that the petitioners completed their training in May, 2017

too has remained uncontroverted in the counter affidavit. It has,

however, been stated in the counter affidavit that a decision has

already been taken in the light of this Court's order dated

09.08.2019 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 16165 of 2019 (Kishor Kumar

and Others) (supra) to grant trained scale 'notionally' to such

untrained teachers who, though, had completed training in May,

2017 but their result was published in March, 2019. It has

however been mentioned that monetary benefits have been

allowed to such teachers from the date of publication of result.

The order issued vide Memo No. 547 dated 22.06.2020 issued by

the Director Primary Education, Government of Bihar has been

brought on record by way of an Annexure to the counter affidavit

which has been purportedly passed in compliance of this Court's Patna High Court CWJC No.7938 of 2020 dt.01-02-2021

order dated 09.08.2019 passed in case of Kishor Kumar and

Others (supra). Referring to the said order dated 22.06.2020, it is

the case of the State of Bihar that the grievance of the petitioner

stands redressed.

4. The said order dated 22.06.2020 is sought to be

challenged in the present proceeding by seeking amendment in the

writ application through I.A. No. 01 of 2020. It is the petitioners'

case that they are entitled to the monetary benefits from the date

of completion of training in the light of this Court's Judgment and

order in case of Kishor Kumar and Others (supra).

5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

petitioners has submitted that decision to grant notional grade pay

from the date of completion of training and refusal to grant actual

monetary benefits from the said date is wholly arbitrary illegal,

unreasonable. As a matter of fact, it amounts to overreaching a

judicial order of this Court in case of Kishor Kumar and Others

(supra) in the pretext of its compliance, he has urged.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances, as noted

above, I.A. No. 01 of 2020 is allowed.

7. The petitioners are thus permitted to challenge the

order dated 22.06.2020 passed by the Director Primary Education,

Government of Bihar, Patna. The averments made in the said Patna High Court CWJC No.7938 of 2020 dt.01-02-2021

application seeking amendment shall be treated to be part of the

main application. It is noteworthy that the State respondents have

dealt with the averments made in the Interlocutory Application

also, in their counter affidavit.

8. Mrs. Binita Singh, learned counsel appearing on

behalf of the State of Bihar on the other hand has argued that the

State Government is competent to grant notional grade pay or

promotion from a particular date and pay actual monetary benefits

from a subsequent date. She has submitted that the petitioners

have been made entitled to all benefits consequential to grant

notional grade pay with effect from the date of completion of

training except actual financial benefits, which too have been

allowed from the date of publication of result.

9. From the facts noted above, it is evident that in

similar circumstance some Panchayat teachers had approached

this Court with a claim that they are entitled for grade pay with

effect from completion of their training and not with effect from

the date of publication of result of the training, as they were not

responsible for the delay in publication of result. This Court in

case of Kishor Kumar and Others (supra) had directed the

Director Primary Education, Government of Bihar, Patna to

consider the case of the petitioner and ".........grant the benefits Patna High Court CWJC No.7938 of 2020 dt.01-02-2021

from the date of completion of training to the petitioners as lapses

on the part of the respondents cannot be a ground to deny the

benefit of trained pay scale.......". In implementation of the said

order the respondents could not have deviated to deny actual

benefits of grant of grade pay from the date of completion of their

training, as the direction is specific in nature to the effect that

lapses on the part of the respondents could not be a ground to

deny the benefits of trained pay scale. Granting notional scale

only with effect from the date of of completion of training, in my

opinion amounts to defying this Court's direction as actual

payment of trained pay scale is a benefit of grant of trained pay

scale, which cannot be denied in the light of this Court's order in

case of Kishor Kumar and Others (supra).

10. This writ application is accordingly allowed.

11. The impugned orders dated 06.01.2020 issued by

the District Programme Officer (Establishment) Bhagalpur and the

order dated 22.06.2020 passed by the Director Primary Education,

Government of Bihar, Patna are hereby quashed.

12. The respondents are directed to ensure that the

petitioners are paid pay scale/grade pay which they are entitled to

from the date of completion of training i.e. May, 2017. The arrears

of salary shall be calculated accordingly and paid to them within a Patna High Court CWJC No.7938 of 2020 dt.01-02-2021

period of three months from the date of receipt/production of a

copy of this order.

13. The Court was contemplating imposition of cost

noticing palpably arbitrary action of the State respondents which

generated unnecessary litigation. Instead of imposing cost it has

been considered apt to issue a note of caution for the Respondents

to be fair and reasonable in future in such matters, particularly

when the matters relate to implementation of Court's orders. It is,

however, directed in the facts and circumstances that let the

respondents ensure that their actions may not generate

unnecessary further litigation and this Court's orders are

uniformly applied in respect of similarly situated employees, as is

expected of a model employer.

(Chakradhari Sharan Singh, J) AKASH/-

AFR/NAFR                        NAFR
CAV DATE                        N/A
Uploading Date                04.02.2021
Transmission Date               N/A