IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CWJC No.2268 of 2008
PANKAJ KUMAR
Versus
THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS
with
CWJC No.18274 of 2010
NARENDRA KUMAR
Versus
THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS
with
CWJC No.17254 of 2010
MD.KALIMUDDIN & ANR
Versus
THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS
-----------
3. 02.12.2010 I.A. No. 10047 of 2010.
This I.A. has been filed by the
petitioner praying for liberty to challenge
the order passed by the respondents, as
contained in Annexures-7 and 8, by which the
claim of the petitioner for payment of
arrears of salary has been rejected on the
ground that his services have already been
terminated.
Considering the facts and
circumstances of the case, the Interlocutory
application is allowed. The petitioner is
granted liberty to challenge the orders as
contained in Annexures- 7 and 8 of the I.A.
These four petitioners in these three
writ applications initially moved this Court
for payment of their arrears of salary. The
2
respondents were directed to file counter
affidavit which they have filed. In the
counter affidavit they have taken stand that
the post on which these petitioners were
posted was later on found to be not existing
and therefore, a problem arose with regard to
payment of their salary. Instructions were
sought for from the Department. On receipt of
the same, the District Compassionate
Committee, met again and recommended for
their appointment as teachers in terms of
circular No.1078 dated 1.7.2006, meaning
thereby that they were to be appointed as
Panchayat Teacheres on fixed remuneration. To
this extent the earlier resolution of the
Compassionate Committee dated 29.9.2004 was
modified and consequential orders have been
issued by the Regional Deputy Director of
Education, Bhagalpur, vide his memo No. 684
dated 28.8.2010. These two documents are
Annexure- 7 and 8 with the I.A. application
of the petitioners.
Learned counsel for the petitioner
drew attention of this Court to the
proceeding of the District Compassionate
Committee dated 29.9.2004, which is Annexure-
3
6 with the I.A. From this proceeding it
appears that as many as 35 candidates were
recommended for appointment on the post of
clerk i.e Class- III post under the
establishment of Regional Deputy Director of
Education, Bhagalpur, which included the
petitioners also. This Court fails to
understand as to why, after the petitioners
moved this Court for payment of their arrears
of salary, the respondents have discovered
that the posts of the petitioners were non
existent and therefore, there was problem in
release of their salary. This Court has an
impression that these petitioners have been
victimized only because they have moved this
Court for arrears of salary.
In the circumstances, the respondent
Regional Deputy Director of Education, is
directed to give the details of all the 35
persons who were recommended for their
appointment on the post of clerk under his
establishment and to place before this Court
definite evidence and materials to justify
their stand in respect of the petitioners.
This Court makes it clear that in case it is
not satisfied with the explanation of the
4
Regional Deputy Director, it may consider
directing for payment of panel interest on
the arrears of salaries of the petitioners
from the packet of the Regional Deputy
Director.
Learned counsel for the respondents
prays four weeks time for the purpose.
Put up this case after four weeks, at
the same position.
Devendra/ ( J. N. Singh, J.)