Patna High Court
S.M. Mansoor Akhtar vs The State Of Bihar Through Shri ... on 6 October, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.980 of 2023
In
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.5345 of 2021
======================================================
1. S.M. Mansoor Akhtar Son of Late Syed Sayeed, Resident of Road No. 2 A,
House No. B/12, Alinagar Colony, Anishabad, Police Station - Gardanibagh,
District - Patna.
2. Md. Jamil Ahmed, Late Ahmed Hussain, Resident of Mohall - Mahalpur,
Post office and Police Station - Biharsharif, District - Nalanda.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through Shri Deepak Kumar Singh, Additional Chief
Secretary Education Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
2. Shri Sanjay Kumar, The Director, Secondary Education Department,
Government of Bihar, Patna.
3. Smt. Sunaina Kumari, The Regional Deputy Director of Education,
Government of Bihar, Patna.
4. Shri Keshav Prasad, District Education Officer, Nalanda at Biharsharif.
5. Shri Sujeet Kumar Rawat, The District Programme Officer (Establishment),
Nalanda at Biharsharif.
6. Shri Bijay Kumar Rajak, The District Provident Fund Officer, Nalanda at
Biharsharif.
7. Shri Praveen Kumar Singh, The Accountant General, Bihar, Patna.
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ram Sagar Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar, AC to GP-23
For the AG : Mrs. Nivedita Nirvikar, Sr. Advocate
Mr. Somesh Kumar, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 06-10-2023
Heard Mr. Ram Sagar Singh, learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the petitioners, Mr. Sanjay Kumar,
learned AC to GP-23 and Mr. Somesh Kumar, learned counsel
for the Accountant General.
2. In compliance of the order of this Court, a
Patna High Court MJC No.980 of 2023 dt.06-10-2023
supplementary show-cause affidavit has been filed on behalf of
the opposite party no. 5 and submissions have been advanced on
behalf of the learned counsel for the State that so far entitlement
of the leave encashment of the petitioners are concerned, since
the very appointment of the petitioners was made in a school,
which was takeover by the Government, thus, the petitioners
shall be allowed earned leave only after three years of the date
of their appointment, in terms of the letter no. 2257 dated
12.10.2004, the copy of which has been marked as Annexure
R/A. He further submits that so far the other retiral benefits/dues
are concerned, the same has already been bestowed upon the
petitioners.
3. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioners
vehemently refuted the contention of the State and submits that
so far the petitioners are concerned, they were duly appointed in
a Minority School approved by, the then, Vidayala Seva Board
and thus, the case of the petitioners do not governed by the letter
issued by the Director, Secondary Education, as noted
hereinabove.
4. Be that as it may, considering the fact that all the
retiral benefits of the petitioners have been paid, save and
except, some part of the leave encashment, which are now being
Patna High Court MJC No.980 of 2023 dt.06-10-2023
claimed by the petitioners.
5. Considering the materials available on record and
the submissions advanced by the parties, this Court deems it fit
and proper to dispose of the contempt petition, having the order
been substantively complied with. However, the petitioners are
at liberty to make appropriate representation before the Director,
Secondary Education, stating all the facts, noted hereinabove, if
the grievance still subsists.
6. It is needless to observe that if such a
representation is filed by the petitioners, the same shall be taken
to its logical conclusion, expeditiously.
(Harish Kumar, J)
shivank/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 09.10.2023.
Transmission Date NA
