Uma Bharti v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Letters Patent Appeal No.28 of 2022 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.6494 of 2021 ====================================================== Uma Bharti, Daughter of Lakshmi Narayan Mahto, Resident of Shivaji Nagar, Basant Ganj, P.O. Lalbagh, P.S. - Darbhanga, District- Darbhanga. ... ... Appellant/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Old Secretariat, Patna.

2.

Principal Secretary, Finance Department, Old Secretariat, Government of Bihar, Patna.

3.

Principal Secretary, Personal and Administrative Department, Old Secretariat, Patna.

4.

Secretary, Rural Development Department, Old Secretariat, Patna. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Appellant/s :

Mr. Pratap Sharma, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Ajay Kr. Rastogi (AAG-10) For the State :

Mr. Parijat Saurav, AC to AAG-13 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE) Date : 04-03-2025 Heard Mr. Pratap Sharma, the learned Advocate for the appellant and Mr. Parijat Saurav, the learned counsel for the State.

2. The appellant is a Lady Extension Officer, who had sought the pay-scale of Level-7, which is being paid to the Extension Officers of Trade and Commerce

Patna High Court L.P.A No.28 of 2022 dt.04-03-2025 2/3 Department.

3. The contention of the appellant before the learned Single Judge was that the Special Secretary to the Government had communicated with the Principal Secretary of Finance Department that the Extension Officers of Trade and Commerce Department perform the same work as the Lady Extension Officers and therefore they should be afforded the same pay-scale.

4. However, such a suggestion was not accepted by the Government on the ground that for Lady Extension Officers, the level of pay suggested by the Pay Commission was Level-6 and not Level-7, which level of pay-scale was exclusively given to the Extension Officers of Trade and Commerce Department considering their posts to be supervisory.

5. The learned Single Judge rightly rejected the claim of the appellant, basing its decision on the dictum of the Supreme Court in P.U. Joshi & Ors. Vs. Accountant General & Ors.; (2003) 2 SCC 632 and

Patna High Court L.P.A No.28 of 2022 dt.04-03-2025 3/3 Rajesh Pravinchandra Rajyaguru Vs. Gujarat Water Supply & Sewerage Board & Others; 2021 SCC Online SC 1282.

6. Post the Government resolution of putting the appellant and other officers on the same ilk under the pay-scale of Level-6, there is no further scope of any discussion on the afore-noted issue.

7. There is no merit in this appeal and the same is dismissed.

(Ashutosh Kumar, ACJ) (Partha Sarthy, J) Shiv/Sunil AFR/NAFR CAV DATE N/A Uploading Date 05.03.2025 Transmission Date