Sudha Trivedy vs The State Of Bihar
2025 Latest Caselaw 15 Patna

Patna High Court

Sudha Trivedy vs The State Of Bihar on 1 May, 2025

Author: Purnendu Singh

Bench: Purnendu Singh

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                   Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.8407 of 2021
     ======================================================
     Sudha Trivedy wife of Siyaram Pandey Resident of Pushpanjali Bihar, flat no
     105, block E, Saristabad Road, Gardanibagh, Patna - 800001.
                                                                  ... ... Petitioner/s
                                        Versus
1.   The State of Bihar, through the Chief Secretary, Bihar, Patna.
2.   The Principal Secretary, Department of Education, Bihar, Patna.
3.   The Director, Higher Secondary Education Department, Govt. of Bihar,
     Patna.
4.   The Deputy Director, Higher Secondary Education Department, Govt. of Bi-
     har, Patna.
5.   The District Magistrate, Vaishali.
6.   The Deputy Development Commissioner - cum - Chief Executive Officer,
     Zila Parishad, Vaishali.
7.   The District Education Officer, Vaishali.
8.   The District Programme Officer (Establishment) Vaishali.
                                               ... ... Respondent/s
     ======================================================
     Appearance :
     For the Petitioner/s    :      Mr. Tej Bahadur Singh, Sr. Advocate.
                                    Mr. Siyaram Pandey, Advocate.
     For the State           :      Mr. P. K. Shahi, Advocate General.
                                    Mr. Madanjeet Kumar, GP-20.
     ======================================================
     CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH
                             ORAL JUDGMENT
      Date : 01-05-2025

                     Heard Mr. Tej Bahadur Singh, learned senior counsel

      along with Mr. Siyaram Pandey, learned counsel appearing on

      behalf of the petitioner and Mr. P. K. Shahi, learned advocate

      General along with Mr. Madanjeet Kumar, learned GP-20 for

      the State.

                     2. The petitioner in paragraph no. 1 of the present writ

      petition has sought, inter alia, following relief(s), which is
 Patna High Court CWJC No.8407 of 2021 dt.01-05-2025
                                           2/12




         reproduced hereinafter:-

                                              "(I) For issuance of writ of certiorari for
                                 setting aside/quashing Para no. (2.8) of file no.11/bi 1-
                                 8/2013-1530

dated 11/8/2015 issued by the education department, Gov. of Bihar, Patna (annexure-6) (II) and be pleased to pass a writ in the nature of writ of mandamus or an appropriate writ/writs, order/orders or direction/directions commanding the respondents to fix and make payment of salary to the petitioner with adding/calculating grade pay in the pay band-5200-20200 with grade pay 2800/ and other benefits like a regular trained assistant teacher as per the letter issued in this regard by the Govt. of Bihar as contained in sankalp sanchika no.11/bi 1-08/2013(ansh-

2)1632 dated 21-06-2017(Annexure-7) for which the petitioner is legally entitled for And/or be pleased to pass such other order or orders which may be deemed fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case."

3. The petitioner has challenged the Clause 2.8 of the

Resolution No. 1530 dated 11.08.2015 on the ground of

discrimination.

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

petitioner submitted that the petitioner is a Niyojit Teacher and

was appointed on 10.04.2019 on the basis of M.A. and B.Ed

degree, as Hindi teacher, to teach Class 10+2 students. The

appointment of the petitioner was done in compliance of the

order passed by the District Appellate Authority, Vaishali as

contained in Memo No. 333 dated 30.03.2019 (Annexure-2).

Terms and conditions are laid down in the said appointment

letter which shows that the appointment of the petitioner was

provisional. The grievance of the petitioner is that Clause 2 of

the Resolution dated 11.08.2015 is applicable in her case and the

petitioner being M.A. trained is entitled to be paid the Grade Patna High Court CWJC No.8407 of 2021 dt.01-05-2025

Pay of Rs. 2800/- applicable to the M.A. trained in the Pay

Scale of Rs. 5200-20200/-, which is applicable to the Higher

Secondary Teachers (10+2 teachers). The petitioner is aggrieved

by the terms and conditions of Clause 2.8 contained in the

Resolution dated 11.08.2015 that she has been discriminated

because of Kalavadhi of two years by not giving grade pay and

the yearly increment from the date of her appointment / being

eligible in accordance with the Bihar Higher Secondary

Teachers (Employment and Service Conditions) Rules, 2006

(hereinafter referred to as the 'Rules 2006').

5. Learned counsel further submitted that the petitioner

had qualified STET on 14.03.2013, passed B.Ed on 02.12.2015

and had applied for the fifth phase of teacher appointment as

Assistant (+2 teacher) in Hindi Subject on 03.10.2016. The

petitioner was appointed on 10.04.2019 vide Memo No. 333

dated 30.03.2019 issued by the D.D.C. cum Chief Executive

Officer, Zila Parishad, Vaishali. The petitioner was, however,

paid her salary for the first time on 29.05.2020, but without

complying with the instruction contained in Certificate No.

1632 dated 21.06.2017 which mandates that trained (+2)

teachers are entitled for Grade Pay 2800 with entry pay

Rs.8000/- multiplied by Index 2.57.

6. Petitioner is aggrieved for non-payment of Grade Patna High Court CWJC No.8407 of 2021 dt.01-05-2025

Pay which allegedly has been denied to her. Learned counsel

submitted that the Resolution No. 1530 dated 11.08.2015, which

for the first time, provides for Grade Pay with Pay Scale to

trained teachers only after completion of two years of

'Kalavadhi', is not in conformity with the Rules, 2006 as

amended till date. In this background, learned counsel submitted

that both trained and untrained teachers have been put on the

same platform which is discriminatory and requires interference

of this Court.

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

State duly sworn by the District Programme Officer

(Establishment), Vaishali giving information that the Education

Department issued Letter No. 1900 dated 04.10.2019 that those

trained teachers who have completed two years service after

01.01.2016 cannot be granted Grade Pay, because the provision

of the Grade Pay had ended after 01.01.2016. It has further been

stated that the petitioner was appointed on 30.03.2019,

thereafter after completion of two years Kalavadhi, the

petitioner became entitled for Grade Pay 2800, corresponding

Level-4, Index-1, as on 10.01.2020, her basic pay was fixed to

the tune of Rs.13780/- (Level-1, Index-2) and accordingly, the

petitioner is being paid in accordance with law. The petitioner

has not been discriminated in any manner.

Patna High Court CWJC No.8407 of 2021 dt.01-05-2025

8. Heard the parties.

9. The Rules, 2006 was amended vide amending

provision of Rules, 2006 as contained in Notification No. 1324

dated 03.07.2012.

10. The definition of 'Secondary Teacher' and 'Higher

Secondary Teacher' as contained in Rule 3(ii) & (iii) of Rules,

2006 is reproduced hereinafter:

"3 (ii) **uxj ek/;fed f"k{kd** ls vfHkizsr gS ek/;fed fo|ky; dk oSlk f"k{kd tks bl fu;ekoyh ds vUrxZr ek/;fed Lrj rd i<+kus gsrq fu;ksftr fd;k x;k gks]

(iii) **uxj mPprj ek/;fed f"k{kd** ls vfHkizsr gS ek/;fed fo|ky; dk oSlk f"k{kd tks bl fu;ekoyh ds vUrxZr mPprj] ek/;fed@baVj Lrj rd i<+kus gsrq fu;ksftr fd;k x;k gks]

11. Eligibility for appointment to the post of Higher

Secondary Teacher as contained in Rule 4 ([k) is reproduced

hereinafter:

4 ([k) uxj mPprj ek/;fed f"k{kd ds fy, vgZÙkk]&

(i) Hkkjr dk ukxfjd gks rFkk fcgkj jkT; ds fuoklh gksA

(ii) fdlh ekU;rk izkIr fo"ofo|ky; ls fofufnZ'V fo'k; esa U;wure 45 izfr"kr vadksa ds lkFk dyk] foKku vFkok okf.kT; fo'k; esa LukrdksÙkj dh fMxzh gksA vuqlwfpr tkfr@vuqlwfpr tu&tkfr@vR;Ur fiNM+k oxZ@fiNM+k oxZ ,oa fodykax ds fy, U;wure fu/kkZfjr vad esa 5 izfr'kr dh NwV nh tk,xhA

(iii)jk'Vªh; v/;kid f'k{kk ifj'kn~ vf/kfu;e ykxw gksus ds iwoZ ekU;rk izkIr izf'k{k.k laLFkk ls ch-,M- vFkok vf/kfu;e ykxw gksus ds ckn jk'Vªh; v/;kid f'k{kk ifj'kn~ }kjk ekU;rk izkIr izf"k{k.k laLFkk ls ch-,M-

dh fMxzhA

12. The Rule 8 of Rules, 2006 provides for

consolidated pay of Rs. 12000/- per month to the trained

teachers and Rs. 10,500/- per month to the untrained teachers

and also for increment of Rs. 600/- after completion of three Patna High Court CWJC No.8407 of 2021 dt.01-05-2025

years to the trained teachers and Rs. 500/- to the untrained

teachers.

13. Similarly separate Rules were framed keeping in

view the spirit / obligation which has been imposed upon the

State as per the mandate of Article 41 read with Article 45 of the

Constitution to secure Right to Free Education as a fundamental

right of children up the age of 14 years. With this object, the

Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009

came into effect and as per the provision of Article 21A of the

Constitution, Right to Free Education became the fundamental

right of the children up to the age of 14 years to fulfill the said

objective, the State of Bihar also framed Rules relating to

different Unit and laid down criteria for the teachers to teach in

Primary and Middle School in the year 2006.

14. To find out whether the petitioner who is a 10+2

teacher has been discriminated in any manner for non payment

of grade pay and her claim that both trained and untrained

teachers have been put on the same platform by Clause 2.8 of

the Resolution dated 11.08.2015, which has been notified with

an object to provide grade pay and corresponding pay scale to

all the Niyojit Teachers. To understand Resolution No. 1530

dated 11.08.2015, the same is reproduced hereinafter:

"2- orZeku esa fu;ksftr f"k{kd ,oa iqLrdky;k/;{k fu;r osru ij dk;Zjr gSA iapk;rh jkt laLFkkvksa ds ek/;e ls lHkh Patna High Court CWJC No.8407 of 2021 dt.01-05-2025

fu;ksftr izf"kf{kr] vizf"kf{kr izkFkfed] ek/;fed] mPp ek/;fed f"k{kd ,oa iqLrdky;k/;{kksa dks fu;r osru ds LFkku ij fuEuor~ vuq"kaflr osrueku nsus dk fu.kZ; fy;k x;k gS%& 2-1 izkFkfed f"k{kd

dz0 inuke la[;k osrueku~ xzsM osru la0

¼vizf"kf{kr½ 2 izkFkfed f"k{kd ¼izf"kf{kr½ 245344 5200&20200 2000

xzsM vizf"kf{kr½ 4 izkFkfed f"k{kd ¼Lukrd 22739 5200&20200 2400 xzsM izf"kf{kr½ dqy f"k{kd ¼izdkf"kr foKfIr 344114 ds fo:) Hkfo'; esa gksusokyh fu;qfDr lfgr½ 2-2 ek/;fed f"k{kd@iqLrdky;k/;{k

dz0 inuke la[;k osrueku~ xzsM osru la0

1 Ekk/;fed f"k{kd ¼vizf"kf{kr½ 4463 5200&20200 0 2 Ekk/;fed f"k{kd ¼izf"kf{kr½ 25038 5200&20200 2400 3 iqLrdky;k/;{k 1900 5200&20200 2400

(10+2) ¼vizf"kf{kr½ 5 mPp Ekk/;fed f"k{kd 26774 5200&20200 2800 (10+2) ¼izf"kf{kr½ dqy f"k{kd ¼izdkf"kr foKfIr 61233 ds fo:) Hkfo'; esa gksusokyh fu;qfDr lfgr½

2-3 izf"kf{kr izkjafHkd] ek/;fed] mPp ek/;fed f"k{kdksa ,oa iqLrdky;k/;{k dks 01 tqykbZ] 2015 ls 5200&20200 ds osrueku esa 5200 dk csfld osru ns; gksxk] ftl ij izkFkfed f"k{kd ¼izf"kf{kr½ dks 2000 :i;s] izkFkfed f"k{kd¼Lukrd xzsM izf"kf{kr½] ek/;fed f"k{kd ¼izf"kf{kr½ ,oa iqLrdky;k/;{k dks 2400 :i;s rFkk mPp ek/;fed ¼izf"kf{kr½ f"k{kd dks 2800 :i;s dks xzsM is ns; gksxkA iwoZ dh x;h lsok ds fy, izR;sd rhu o'kZ dh lsok ds fy, ,d okf'kZd osru o`f) rhu izfr"kr dh nj ls ns; gksxhA

2-4 vizf"kf{kr izkjafHkd] vizf"kf{kr ek/;fed ,oa vizf"kf{kr mPp ek/;fed f"k{kdksa dks 5200&20200 osrueku esa 01 tqykbZ] 2015 ls 5200 dk csfld osru ns; gksxk] ijarq xzsM is ns; ugha gksxkA vizf"kf{kr izkjafHkd] ek/;fed] mPp ek/;fed f"k{kdksa dks Patna High Court CWJC No.8407 of 2021 dt.01-05-2025

izf"kf{kr gksus ds mijkar vuq"kaflr osrueku dk xszM is ns; gksxkA iwoZ esa dh x;h lsok ds fy, izR;sd rhu o'kZ dh lsok ds fy, ,d okf'kZd osru o`f) rhu izfr"kr dh nj ls ns; gksxhA 2-5 izf"kf{kr ,oa vizf"kf{kr izkjafHkd] ek/;fed] mPp ek/;fed f"k{kdksa ,oa iqLrdky;k/;{kksa dks le;&le; ij jkT; ljdkj ds dfeZ;ksa ds vuq:i ?kksf'kr egaxkbZ HkRrk] fpfdRlk HkRrk] edku fdjk;k HkRrk ,oa ns; okf'kZd osru o`f) ns; gksxhA 2-6 vizf"kf{kr izkjafHkd] ek/;fed ,oa mPp ek/;fed] f"k{kdksa dks 01 tqykbZ 2015 dks ns; osru esa de ls de U;wure 20 izfr"kr dh o`f) dh tk;sxhA ftu ekeyksa esa 20 izfr"kr ls de o`f) fu/kkZfjr gksxh] oSls ekeyksa esa 20 izfr"kr rd o`f) djus ds fy, 100 ds xq.kd esa jkf"k tksM+h tk;sxh] ftls oS;fDrd osru ekuk tk;sxkA oS;fDrd osru ij egaxkbZ HkRrk ns; ugha gksxkA 2-7 vizf"kf{kr izkjafHkd f"k{kd ¼Lukrd xzsM½ ,oa vizf"kf{kr ek/;fed f"k{kdksa dks fo"ks'k HkRrk ds :i esa 1500 :i;s dh jkf"k izfrekg nh tk;sxh] ftlij egaxkbZ HkRrk ns; ugha gksxkA ;g jkf"k bl mn~ns"; ls nh tk jgh gS fd izkFkfed] iz[kaM f"k{kd] ek/;fed ,oa mPp ek/;fed f"k{kd ds osru esa iwoZ dh Hkkafr vUrj jgsA 2-8 fu;ksftr ,oa Hkfo'; esa fu;ksftr izf"kf{kr izkjafHkd] ek/;fed] mPp ek/;fed f"k{kdksa ,oa iqLrdky;k/; {kksa dks osrueku ds lkFk xszM is dh ns;rk mudh lsok ds nks o'kZ iwjk gksus ds mijkar ns; gksxhA nks o'kZ dh dkykfo/k esa bUgsa vizf"kf{kr izkjafHkd] vizf"kf{kr ek/;fed] vizf"kf{kr mPp ek/;fed f"k{kdksa ds vuq:i osrueku ns; gksxkA

15. The present writ petition was heard on several

dates and to clarify the above Resolution, learned Advocate

General and the Additional Chief Secretary are present before

the Court. It was noticed in course of hearing in the present writ

petition and other writ petitions where also the Resolution No.

1530 dated 11.08.2015 in question in respect of Elementary and

Middle School don't find reference of Grade Pay applicable to

the teachers of the Middle School or Elementary School which

is contrary to the Sub Clause (ii) of Clause (1) of the

Notification No. 215 dated 23.08.2010 issued by the NCTE. The

Notification is mandatorily required to be followed by giving

benefit of the Resolution dated 11.08.2015 in respect of those Patna High Court CWJC No.8407 of 2021 dt.01-05-2025

teachers of Middle School and Elementary School who were

appointed under Rules, 2006, 2012 and 2020 and not given

effect by their appointing units. Sub Clause (ii) of Clause (1) of

the Notification No. 215 dated 23.08.2010 issued by the NCTE

with regard to qualification of Class VI to VIII are reproduced

hereinafter:

1. Minimum Qualification

(ii) Classes VI-VIII

(a) BA/B.Sc and 2-year Diploma in Elementary Education (by whatever name known) OR BA/B.Sc. with at least 50% marks and 1-year Bachelor in Education (B. Ed) OR BA/B.Sc. with at least 45% marks and 1-year Bachelor in Education (B. Ed), in accordance with the NCTE (Recognition Norms and Procedure) Regulations issued from time to time in this regard OR Senior Secondary (or its equivalent) with at least 50% marks and 4-year Bachelor in Elementary Education (B. El. Ed) OR Senior Secondary (or its equivalent) with at least 50% marks and 4-year BA/B.Sc. Ed or B.A. Ed./BSc. Ed.

OR BA/B.Sc. with at least 50% marks and 1-year B.Ed. (Special Education) AND

(b) Pass in the Teacher Eligibility Test (TET), to be conducted by the appropriate Government in accordance with the Guidelines framed by the NCTE for the purpose.

16. Learned Advocate General in this view informs

that necessary steps to rectify will be taken by the Additional

Chief Secretary so that the teachers of Middle School or

Elementary School who are also entitled for graduate trained

grade pay, if not paid for any valid reason, will be treated Patna High Court CWJC No.8407 of 2021 dt.01-05-2025

equally and for them necessary amendment or rectification will

be made in the Notification contained in Resolution No. 1530

dated 11.08.2015 to avoid discrimination, if any.

17. Be that as it may be, in the facts of the present

case, Vide Resolution No. 1530 dated 11.08.2015, Grade Pay

was made applicable to the trained teachers irrespective of the

Classes in which they were appointed by different appointing

units.

18. The Grade Pay had come to an end with effect

from 01.01.2016 as a result of 7th Pay Commission. Pay Matrix

introduced a simplified, transparent and more efficient system

for managing salaries and pension. It merged pay band and

grade pay into a single unified level eliminating discrepancies.

19. It has been clarified by learned Advocate General

that the petitioner has not been discriminated in any manner

rather the Resolution is beneficial in nature irrespective of their

appointment as per Rules, 2006. He further explained that the

mechanism of giving the benefit of grade pay to the teachers

from the date of their appointment subject to kalavadhi of two

years to all the Niyojit Teachers is not discriminatory in any

manner.

20. In the present case, the petitioner who was

appointed in the year 2019 has already been granted the benefit Patna High Court CWJC No.8407 of 2021 dt.01-05-2025

of grade pay in Level 4, Index - 1 in terms of the Clause 2.8 of

the Resolution No. 1530 dated 11.08.2015, which prescribes two

years of Kalavadhi from the date of appointment i.e.

10.04.2019. The case of the petitioner is covered by a Division

Bench Judgment of this Court vide Judgment dated

10.08.2023 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 2417 of 2022 (Rajanish

Kumar Mishra & Ors. Vs. The State of Bihar & Ors.),

wherein the Division Bench has held the kalavadhi for a period

of two years from the date of initial appointment to be valid.

Therefore, no interference can be made by this Court in this

regard.

21. Clause 2.8 of the Resolution No. 1530 dated

11.08.2015 prescribes Kalavadhi for a period of two years for

granting Grade Pay in accordance with the qualification and

entitlement which is entirely in domain of the State Government

to include such condition which is subject to Kalavadhi of two

years to the eligible teachers. The Resolution dated 11.08.2015

cannot be said to be in violation of the Rules framed under

Article 309 of the Constitution and the same has been issued in

exercise of the power conferred under Article 166 of the

Constitution and challenge of the Clause 2.8 of the aforesaid

Resolution on the point of discrimination is rejected in the case

of the petitioner, who has been appointed after coming into Patna High Court CWJC No.8407 of 2021 dt.01-05-2025

force of the said Resolution.

22. The petitioner who is a 10+2 teacher, if finds that,

she is aggrieved in any other manner may avail remedy before

the appropriate authority for considering her grievance in

accordance with law.

23. The writ petition stands disposed of.

(Purnendu Singh, J) mantreshwar/-

AFR/NAFR              N.A.F.R.
CAV DATE              N.A.
Uploading Date        12.05.2025
Transmission Date     N.A.