Research › Search › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

2000 DIGILAW 360 (PAT)

Nawal Kishore Singh v. State Of Bihar

2000-03-04

SUDHANSU JYOTI MUKHOPADHAYA

body2000
Judgment 1. Heard the counsel for the petitioner and the State. 2. As the case can be disposed of on short point, it is not necessary to discuss all the facts, except the relevant one. 3. The petitioner was functioning as a teacher in one Jyoti Surya Girls High School, Patahi in the district of East Charnparan since 12th January, 1979. The school was taken over as a Government Project School, vide letter no. 108 dated 12th February, 1985. Subsequently, in pursuance of Circular No. 142 dated 4th February, 1989, the cases of petitioner and others were screeneu by the Screening Committee. No order of approval of the service/take over of service having issued, the petitioner had to move this Court in C.W.J.C. No. 1182 of 1993, which was allowed on 1st May, 1995. In pursuance of Courts order, the petitioners service has been recognised/taken over, vide order dated 16th June, 1997, as issued by the Director, Secondary Education, Govt. of Bihar. 4. The grievance of the petitioner is that though his service has been recognised/taken over and he is in fact, entitled for salary from the date of take over, having functioned as teacher, but the salary has been ordered to be paid from prospective date of issuance of order dated 16th June, 1997 and not even with effect from 1.1.1989, as decided by Respondents, vide Circular No. 142 dated 4th February, 1989. 5. The 4th Respondent in his counter affidavit, has not disputed the fact that the service of petitioner has been taken over/recognised on take over of the school, as Project School, vide order dated 16th June, 1997. It is also not disputed that the petitioner is/was functioning in the said school. Mere plea taken is that the Director recognised the service of petitioner in place of Smt. Ramjana Kumari, on temporary and ad hoc basis. However, such plea cannot be accepted, the petitioner having worked ever since take over of the school and his services having recognised/taken over, even on ad hoc basis. 6. In similar case of Yogendra Prasad Singh vs. State of Bihar and ors. (C.W.J.C. No. 3996/97), this Court vide order dated 11th August, 1998, allowed salary in favour of said petitioner with effect from 1.1.1989 in view of Government Policy decision. 7. 6. In similar case of Yogendra Prasad Singh vs. State of Bihar and ors. (C.W.J.C. No. 3996/97), this Court vide order dated 11th August, 1998, allowed salary in favour of said petitioner with effect from 1.1.1989 in view of Government Policy decision. 7. For the reason aforesaid, while I hold the part of the order dated 16th June, 1997 (Annexure-2) as illegal, wherein it has been ordered to pay salary from prospective date, direct the Respondents to pay the petitioner his salary at least with effect from 1.1.1989, as is being paid to others. The arrears, on fixation of pay, must be paid within three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. 8. The writ petition is allowed with the aforesaid observations and directions.