Kapileshwar Choudhary vs The State Of Bihar And Ors
2026 Latest Caselaw 560 Patna

Patna High Court

Kapileshwar Choudhary vs The State Of Bihar And Ors on 20 February, 2026

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                    Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.24819 of 2013
     ======================================================
     Kapileshwar Choudhary S/O Late Janardan Choudhary R/O Village
     Basukibihari, P.S. Madhurapur In The District Of Madhubani

                                                                     ... ... Petitioner/s
                                      Versus
1.   The State Of Bihar and Ors Government Of Bihar, Patna
2.   Administrator, Bihar State Road Transport Corporation, Patna
3.   Managing Director, Bihar State Road Transport Corporation, Patna
4.   The District Magistrate, Patna

                                               ... ... Respondent/s
     ======================================================
     Appearance :
     For the Petitioner/s   :          Mr. Sanjeev Kumar, Advocate
     For the Respondent/s   :          Mr. Ajay, Sr. Advocate
     ======================================================
        CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. G. ANUPAMA CHAKRAVARTHY

                                 ORAL JUDGMENT
                                 Date : 20-02-2026

                  1. The petitioner has filed the instant

      application for the following relief:

                                "(I) To quash the office order
                      bearing order no. 144 dated 08.02.2008
                      issued under the signature of V. N. Jha,
                      Director          Vigilance      and       Security        (In-
                      Charge            Chief       Personnel)           in      the
                      department of Bihar sate road transport
                      department              Govt.      of   Bihar        Patna..
                      Whereby and where under it is further
                      directed that the back wages of the
                      petitioner shall not be paid.
                                (II)     To     direct     the       respondent
                      authority to pay the entire back wages
 Patna High Court CWJC No.24819 of 2013 dt.20-02-2026
                                           2/10




                          of the petitioner in view of order dated
                          22.8.2006

passed by Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Patna in reference case no. 39/1995 with statutory interest over the amount.

(III) Also to direct respondent authority to provide all consequential benefits of the petitioner in view of above mentioned order.

(IV) Also any other relief/reliefs for which petitioner is found to be entitled in the eye of law."

2. The case of the petitioner, as culled

out from the writ petition, is that he was initially

appointed as a Driver in the Bihar State Road

Transport Corporation on 20.06.1988. It is stated

that he discharged his duties sincerely and was

posted on the Patna-Darbhanga Deluxe Bus route.

According to the petitioner, during the course of

inspection, four passengers were found travelling

without ticket. A domestic enquiry was initiated

against him and he was suspended on 19.03.1990.

It is alleged that the enquiry was conducted in

violation of principles of natural justice and without Patna High Court CWJC No.24819 of 2013 dt.20-02-2026

affording him adequate opportunity of hearing.

Ultimately, vide order dated 16.09.1991, he was

dismissed from service.

3. It is further stated that the petitioner

challenged the order of dismissal before the

Labour Court, Patna, which was registered as

Reference Case No. 39/1995. After adjudication by

award dated 22.08.2006, the Presiding Officer,

Labour Court, Patna directed reinstatement of the

petitioner along with payment of full back wages

and other consequential benefits. It is the

grievance of the petitioner that though he was

reinstated to service pursuant to the award, vide

Office Order No. 144 dated 08.02.2008 but the

respondents denied payment of back wages.

According to him, such action is illegal and

amounts to non-compliance of the award passed

by the Labour Court. It is further submitted that

the petitioner has been working since his

reinstatement with sincerity and the denial of back

wages for nearly 15 years is wholly arbitrary and

unsustainable in law.

Patna High Court CWJC No.24819 of 2013 dt.20-02-2026

4. Per contra, the Learned counsel

appearing on behalf of the respondents has

opposed the writ petition. It is submitted that the

writ petition is hit by delay and laches. The cause

of action had arisen in the year 2006 and the

impugned office order was passed in the year

2008, whereas the petitioner has approached this

Court after several years without any plausible

explanation.

5. It is further submitted that the

petitioner had an alternative statutory remedy

under Section 33-C(1) of the Industrial Disputes

Act, 1947, for recovery of money, in terms of the

award, but the same has not been availed. Hence,

the writ petition is not maintainable.

6. The Learned counsel draws attention

towards Section 17A of the Industrial Disputes Act

which deals with enforceability of awards and

submitted that the award has become inoperative

by virtue of Section 19 of the Act. Section 17A of

the Industrial Disputes Act, reads as follows:

"17A. Commencement of Patna High Court CWJC No.24819 of 2013 dt.20-02-2026

the award.--(1) An award (including an arbitration award) shall become enforceable on the expiry of thirty days from the date of its publication under section 17:

Provided that--

(a) if the appropriate Government is of opinion, in any case where the award has been given by a Labour Court or Tribunal in relation to an industrial dispute to which it is a party; or

(b) if the Central Government is of opinion, in any case where the award has been given by a National Tribunal, that it will be inexpedient on public grounds affecting national economy or social justice to give effect to the whole or any part of the award, the appropriate Government, or as the case may be, the Central Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, declare that the award shall not become enforceable on the expiry of the said period of thirty days.

(2) Where any declaration has been made in relation to an award under the proviso to sub-section (1), Patna High Court CWJC No.24819 of 2013 dt.20-02-2026

the appropriate Government or the Central Government may, within ninety days from the date of publication of the award under section 17, make an order rejecting or modifying the award, and shall, on the first available opportunity, lay the award together with a copy of the order before the Legislature of the State, if the order has been made by a State Government, or before Parliament, if the order has been made by the Central Government.

(3) Where any award as rejected or modified by an order made under sub-section (2) is laid before the Legislature of a State or before Parliament, such award shall become enforceable on the expiry of fifteen days from the date on which it is so laid; and where no order under sub-

section (2) is made in pursuance of a declaration under the proviso to sub- section (1), the award shall become enforceable on the expiry of the period of ninety days referred to in sub-

section (2).

(4) Subject to the provisions of sub-section (1) and sub- Patna High Court CWJC No.24819 of 2013 dt.20-02-2026

section (3) regarding the enforceability of an award, the award shall come into operation with effect from such date as may be specified therein, but where no date is so specified, it shall come into operation on the date when the award becomes enforceable under sub-section (1) or sub- section (3), as the case may be.]"

7. It is submitted that the petitioner

was a habitual offender and had earlier been

subjected to disciplinary proceedings. The

misconduct alleged against him was serious in

nature, involving breach of trust while discharging

duties as a driver of a commercial transport

corporation dealing with public revenue. It is

contended that the Labour Court erred in granting

reinstatement with full back wages and the

Corporation is running at a loss, and it cannot be

burdened with payment of back wages for nearly

17 years without any work. Therefore, the Learned

counsel for the respondents prayed to dismiss the

writ petition as it is devoid of merits.

8. Heard The Learned counsel for the Patna High Court CWJC No.24819 of 2013 dt.20-02-2026

parties and perused the materials available on

record. The primary grievance of the petitioner is

against the office order dated 08.02.2008 whereby

back wages were denied despite the award dated

22.08.2006 passed by the Labour Court. However,

it is an admitted fact that the petitioner has

approached this Court after a considerable delay.

The cause of action, if any, arose in the year 2006

and the award was passed in the year 2008 and

the Writ application was preferred in the year

2013. No satisfactory explanation has been

provided by the petitioner for approaching this

Court after such a long period of time. Further, the

Industrial Disputes Act provides for a specific

mechanism under Section 33-C(1) for recovery of

money due under an award. The petitioner has not

availed the said statutory remedy. It is well settled

that where an efficacious alternative remedy is

available under a statute, this Court, in exercise of

its writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the

Constitution of India, ordinarily does not entertain

such petition, specially when the disputed question Patna High Court CWJC No.24819 of 2013 dt.20-02-2026

is relating to computation and enforceability of

monetary benefits.

9. This Court also finds that the

petitioner remained out of service for a substantial

period and serious allegations of misconduct had

been levelled against him. The Corporation has

specifically pleaded loss of confidence in the

petitioner and about the financial constraints.

These are matters which required adjudication

before the appropriate forum under the Industrial

Disputes Act.

10. The reliance placed by the

respondents on Section 17A of the Industrial

Disputes Act regarding enforceability of awards

further indicates that questions relating to

operation, enforceability and implementation of

the award are matters to be examined within the

statutory framework of the Act. These questions

cannot be examined in writ jurisdiction, particularly

when disputed facts are involved.

11. The counsel appearing on behalf of

the corporation submits that award of the Labour Patna High Court CWJC No.24819 of 2013 dt.20-02-2026

Court which is the basis of petitioner's claim is

inoperative as he cannot rely on such award after

expiry of prescribed period under the Act. Vide

order dated 06.01.2024, the petitioner was asked

to bring on record whether the award of Labour

Court was published or not. However, the

petitioner has failed to do so.

12. In view of the discussions made

hereinabove, this Court is of the considered

opinion that the writ petition is devoid of merits

and does not warrant interference under Article

226 of the Constitution of India.

13. Accordingly, the writ petition stands

dismissed.

14. Interlocutory Application(s), if any,

shall stands disposed of.

(G. Anupama Chakravarthy, J) Spd/-

AFR/NAFR                NAFR
CAV DATE                NA
Uploading Date          20.02.2026
Transmission Date