Manoj Kumar Poddar vs The State Of Bihar
2022 Latest Caselaw 5337 Patna

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                  Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No 16327 of 2019
     ======================================================

1. Manoj Kumar Poddar Son of Late Krishnakant Poddar, Resident of Village-

Shahpur, P.O). - Bhore Jairam, P.S.- Khanpur Ward No. 11, District- Samastipur.

2. Kishore Kumar Choudhary, Son of Late Jeeb Nath Choudhary, R/o Village and P.O.- Sapta, P.S.- Rahika, District- Samastipur.

3. Rajiv Kumar Ranjan Son of Late mahendra Mandal, R/o Village and P.O.-

Baisha, P.S.- Parvatta Ward No.8 Yadav Tola, District- Khagaria.

... ... Petitioner/s Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Public Health Engineering Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

2. The Principal Secretary, Finance Department, Govt of Bihar, Patna.

3. The Additional Secretary, Finance Department Govt of Bihar, Patna.

4. The Engineer-in-Chief -cum- Special Secretary, Public Health Engineering Department, Bihar, Patna.

5. The Chief Engineer (Mechanical), Public Health Engineering Department, Bihar, Patna.

6. The Superintending Engineer, Public Health Engineering Circle, Darbhanga.

... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== For the Petitioner/s : Mr Siyaram Pandey, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr Bijoy Kr Sinha, AC to AAG V ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD ORAL JUDGMENT

Date : 20-12-2022

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the

respondents.

2 For being granted benefit of decision of this Court in

the case of Binit Kumar & Others -Versus- State of Bihar &

Others decided in CWJC No 9921 of 2017, as affirmed in LPA No

1702 of 2017 & analogous cases, the petitioners had earlier

approached this Court by filing a writ petition. The said writ

petition bearing CWJC No 4367 of 2019 was disposed of by this Patna High Court CWJC No.16327 of 2019 dt.20-12-2022

Court under order dated 08.03.2019 (Annexure 4) so as to enable

filing of a representation before the Principal Secretary, Finance

Department, Government of Bihar for consideration of the

petitioners' claim on ground of parity with petitioners of CWJC

No 9921 of 2017. The petitioners' representation has been rejected

under order dated 09.07.2019 (Annexure 6). The same has

necessitated the petitioners to reapproach this Court by way of this

instant proceeding. The petitioners' claim for parity with

beneficiaries of petitioners of CWJC No 9921 of 2017 has been

rejected by the Principal Secretary by an order wherein the

following reason forms the basis of rejection:

"वरर 2014 esa fu;ksDrk }kjk vkosndksa dk inuke esa lq/kkj djrs gq, fuEuoxhZ; fyfid djrs gq, Hkwy dh lq/kkj dh xbZA ;g Hkwy lq/kkj foŸk foHkkxh; ladYi la[;k&3111] fnukad&[email protected]@2015 ds fuxZr gksus ds igys fd;k x;kA tcfd fcuhr dqekj oxSjg ds vf/kdka"k vkosndksa dk in ifjorZu fnukad&[email protected]@2015 ds ckn fd;k x;kA bl izdkj bu ik¡pksa dk ekeyk fcuhr dqekj oxSjg ds ekeys ds gw&c&gw ugha izrhr gksrk gSA vr% buyksxksa dk vH;kosnu vLohd`r fd;k tkrk gSA "

3 From bare reading of the relevant extract of the order

itself, it is apparent that the petitioners' claim has been rejected by

recording that most of the petitioners of CWJC No 9921 of 2017

were subjected to correction of their pay scale, post issuance of the

departmental circular dated 25.03.2015 whereas in the case of the Patna High Court CWJC No.16327 of 2019 dt.20-12-2022

petitioners, their corrections have been effected prior to the said

notification. From bare reading of the reasons itself, it is apparent

that the same cannot be made the basis for concluding that all the

petitioners of CWJC No 9921 of 2017 were subjected to correction

of their scale, post issuance of the notification dated 25.03.2015.

The distinction, sought to be created, is factually and legally

unsustainable even from bare reading of the order dated

09.07.2019, impugned in the instant writ proceedings. In so far as

this reason is concerned, this Court is not inclined to accept the

same.

4 The impugned order dated 09.07.2019, therefore, is

quashed.

5 The petitioners' claim is to be considered in light of

the decision of this Court in the case of Binit Kumar (supra) and

consequential relief (s) must be given and dues, found admissible,

must be paid to the petitioners within three months from the date

of receipt/production of a copy of this order.

6 Writ petition is allowed.

(Madhuresh Prasad, J) M.E.H./-

AFR/NAFR                     NAFR
CAV DATE                      NA
Uploading Date            25.12.2022
Transmission Date             NA