Patna High Court
Pankaj Kumar vs The State Of Bihar on 15 September, 2025
Author: Ajit Kumar
Bench: Ajit Kumar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.7931 of 2019
======================================================
Pankaj Kumar S/o Late Shambhu Sharan Singh Resident of Village- Aifni,
PO- Aifni, PS- Ariyari, District- Sheikhpura, Bihar, Pin- 811105.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. The Principal Secretary, Department of Education, Government of Bihar,
Patna.
3. The Secretary, Department of Education, Government of Bihar, Patna.
4. The District Magistrate (DM), District- Sheikhpura, Bihar.
5. The District Education Officer (DEO), District- Sheikhpura, Bihar.
6. The District Programme Officer (DPO), District- Sheikhpura, Bihar.
7. The Block Education Officer, Block- Ariyari, District- Sheikhpura, Bihar.
8. The Block Development Officer (BDO), Ariyari, Sheikhpura, Bihar.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Abhishek Krishna Gupta, Adv.
For the Respondent/s : Ms Abhanjali, AC to GA-12
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT KUMAR
ORAL JUDGMENT
3 15-09-2025
Heard Mr. Abhishek Krishna Gupta, learned counsel
for the petitioner and learned GA-12 duly assisted by Ms.
Abhanjali, learned AC to GA-12.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has filed the
instant writ application for payment of salary from the date of
joining in terms of the judgment rendered by the Hon'ble
Division Bench in Letters Patent Appeal No. 63 of 2014 vide
order dated 01.09.2016.
3. It is the case of the petitioner that as against 18
vacant posts of Panchayat Teachers, the petitioner's appointment
Patna High Court CWJC No.7931 of 2019 dt.15-09-2025
under the Bihar Panchayat Primary Teacher (Appointment and
Service Conditions) Rules, 2006 was made. Later, the
petitioner's appointment was alleged to be illegal terming him to
have wrongly entered into the service and accordingly, the claim
of payment of salary was not made, since the date of joining. It
is the case of the petitioner that he continued to discharge his
duties on the post since initial joining made pursuant to the
selection on the post of Panchayat Teacher. The petitioner
further contends that in the case of other similarly situated
persons, various enquiries were directed and termination orders
in some cases were passed with respect to certain similarly
situated persons, who had to approach the Appellate Authority,
whose appeals were dismissed and against the order of
Appellate Authority, writ petition was preferred, which was
disposed of vide order dated 21.02.2013 passed in CWJC No.
935 of 2010 and the following order was passed:-
"The only reason why the District
Teacher Employment Appellate Tribunal,
Sheikhpura did not decide the lis was because
a criminal case has already been filed, most of
the records have been seized and are lying
before the Judicial Magistrate for trial.
If the petitioners file all the relevant
documents, which they have obtained as
authentic copies under Right to Information
Act, and they satisfy the requirements of their
authenticity as well as help in adjudication of
the issue raised, the Tribunal may endeavour
Patna High Court CWJC No.7931 of 2019 dt.15-09-2025
to re-look into the matter afresh and take a
decision on the status of these petitioners. It is
made clear that if any clarification is required
on any document, that may always be got in
from the court of concerned Judicial
Magistrate.
Writ is disposed of with the above
direction."
4. In view of the aforesaid order of remand passed by
this Court to hear afresh, the Appellate Authority considered
their cases and returned a finding vide order dated 27.08.2013,
whereby it was held that in absence of documents, the Appellate
Authority cannot take any decision and accordingly, on their
appeals so filed pursuant to the remand by the Co-ordinate
Bench of this Court, the said appeal was dismissed.
5. Being aggrieved by the said decision of the
appellate authority dated 27.08.2013, the writ petition being
CWJC No. 19201 of 2013 was again preferred by them, which
stood dismissed. Consequent thereupon, Letters Patent Appeal
No. 63 of 2014 was filed in which the stand of the appellants
was that their appointments were made in the year 2006 but
their services were terminated consequent to the order passed by
the Block Development Officer, which order has been set aside.
It is thereafter none of the authorities have found any illegality
in the order of appointment of the appellants and the enquiry
Patna High Court CWJC No.7931 of 2019 dt.15-09-2025
into the appointment has not been concluded because of lack of
documents, therefore, for lack of documents, the Appellants
cannot be kept out of service. In this background, the Hon'ble
Division Bench examined their cases and found that though the
order passed by Block Development Officer was interfered with
by the Appellate Authority but the Appellate Authority did not
find any illegality in the process of the appointment of those
appellants, may be for the reasons that the documents are not
available. The facts remains that there is no finding in respect of
illegal appointment of those appellants by the competent
authorities i.e. the District Teachers Employment Appellate
Authority. In absence of any such finding to keep the Appellants
out of job, seems to be harsh and unreasonable.
6. Further, the Hon'ble Division Bench recorded the
finding while interfering with the order that the learned Single
Judge has found that no persons having lesser marks than the
appellants were appointed and there is no factual basis to return
such finding denying the relief besides there is no adverse
finding as against those similarly situated persons, who are said
to have been appointed on the post of Panchayat Teachers
pursuant to the selection process initiated by the Selection
Committee of the said Panchayat.
Patna High Court CWJC No.7931 of 2019 dt.15-09-2025
7. It is in that background, the order passed by the
learned Co-ordinate Bench was interfered with and the
appellants of Letters Patent Appeal No. 63 of 2014 were
directed to be reinstated expeditiously within 15 days and
payment of wages from the date of their reinstatement were
directed.
8. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that his
case is on better footing because of the fact that the services of
this petitioner was never terminated and he continued to
discharge the duties on the post of Panchayat Teacher since the
date of joining and, therefore, his case can also be considered in
similar terms and similar benefits may also be directed to be
extended if the case of the petitioner squarely falls within the
parameters of the case, which has been adjudicated by the
Hon'ble Division Bench in Letters Patent Appeal No. 63 of
2014.
9. Learned counsel for the petitioner next submits
that in case of similarly situated persons of the same district
who had approached this Court and had sought direction for
payment of arrears of salary in the light of order dated
01.09.2016 passed in Letters Patent Appeal No. 63 of 2014, the
Hon'ble Court vide order dated 14.02.2020 passed in CWJC No.
Patna High Court CWJC No.7931 of 2019 dt.15-09-2025
24491 of 2019 without going into the merits of the case
disposed of the writ petition of those petitioners by directing the
respondent to examine the case of those petitioners in the light
of decision rendered in Letters Patent Appeal No. 63 of 2014 on
01.09.2016 and pass appropriate orders with regard to payment
of salary to those petitioners within a maximum period of three
months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of the
order.
10. It has next been submitted that the petitioner has
no reservation with regard to any enquiry undertaken by the
respondents in similar terms as has been directed to be held in
case of the appellants of Letters Patent Appeal No. 63 of 2014
and he is ready to co-operate with the enquiry so directed to be
undertaken by the Respondents and in case if it is found that the
claim of this petitioner is genuine, then necessary consequential
order with regard to payment of salary may also be directed to
be passed in favour of the petitioner without any inordinate
delay.
11. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State
takes this Court to the statement made in the counter affidavit
specifically in paragraphs 10 and 11 wherein the allegations of
wrong entry in service is alleged and as also the applicability of
Patna High Court CWJC No.7931 of 2019 dt.15-09-2025
benefits of judgment rendered by the Hon'ble Division Bench in
Letters Patent Appeal No. 63 of 2014 has also been questioned.
12. In order to buttress their submissions, further
argument has been advanced by the counsel for the State that the
petitioner may not be allowed the benefit of the said judgment
passed by the Hon'ble Court vide order dated 14.02.2020 passed
in CWJC No. 24491 of 2019, in view of the fact that the
petitioner was not a party in the said writ petition. Consequent
thereupon, the Letters Patent Appeal No. 63 of 2014, which is
said to have been adjudicated by the Hon'ble Division Bench.
13. This Court has considered the rival submissions
and finds that the Hon'ble Division Bench has passed an order
asking the respondents to undertake the enquiry with regard to
verification of the documents, consequent thereupon, the
appointment is directed to be made in respect to those
Appellants, for which this petitioner is also ready to face such
enquiry and furthermore, the petitioner's case is on a better
footing for the simple reasons that the respondents themselves
have allowed this petitioner to continue with his duties, right
from the date of his initial joining given in the year 2018.
Therefore, the arguments so advanced for rejecting the claim of
this petitioner, would not lie good in their mouth. Because on
Patna High Court CWJC No.7931 of 2019 dt.15-09-2025
one hand, the respondents contend that the appointment of the
petitioner is illegal, still no termination order has been passed in
respect of the petitioner and the respondents have allowed the
petitioner to continue on the post is sufficient enough to, prima
facie, hold that no adverse material is found against this
petitioner.
14. In view of the aforesaid, the argument that the
appointment of the petitioner is illegal, cannot be accepted and
is hereby rejected for the reason that the respondents cannot be
allowed to approbate and reprobate as the said doctrine is a
species of estoppel which lies in between "Estoppel by Records
and "Estoppel in Pais". "Estoppel in Pais" in legal parlance is
also known as equitable estoppel or estoppel by conduct, is a
doctrine that prevents a party from asserting a right or defense
that is inconsistent with their prior/previous action or conduct.
15. Since this petitioner has been allowed to serve
against the post without any hindrance, therefore, the
respondents without disturbing the petitioner in any manner, are
vested only with the liberty to verify his documents strictly in
consonance with the direction issued in the Letters Patent
Appeal No. 63 of 2014 and if the documents are found genuine
and is eligible for payment of the respective amount of arrears
Patna High Court CWJC No.7931 of 2019 dt.15-09-2025
of salary from the date of initial joining, the same shall be
calculated and be paid to this petitioner without any further
delay but within the maximum period of three months from the
date of production/receipt of a copy of this order.
16. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the
writ petition stands disposed of.
(Ajit Kumar, J)
perwez
AFR/NAFR AFR
CAV DATE N/A
Uploading Date 19.09.2025
Transmission Date 19.09.2025
