Pramod Prasad Sinha v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1467 of 2018 ====================================================== Pramod Prasad Sinha, Son of Late Ram Khelawan Singh, resident of Village- Kharijama, P.O. Chandhari, P.S. Islampur, Dist- Nalanda. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary Education Department Bihar, Patna.

2. The Director, Primary Education Bihar, Patna.

3. The District Magistrate, Nawada.

4. The District Education Officer, Nawada.

5. The Block Education Officer, Sirdala (Nawada).

6. The District Programme Officer (Establishment) Nawada.

7. The Mukhiya Village Panchayat Ghiraundh, Sirdala, (Nawada).

8. The Panchayat Secretary Village Panchayat Ghiraund Sirdala, Nawada. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Shankar Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Sunil Kumar, AC to GA12 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPADHYAY ORAL ORDER 16-02-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was paid regular salary till February, 2017 and thereafter the salary of the petitioner was stopped without any rhyme or reason. He submits that the petitioner has approached the District Programme Officer, Establishment, Nawadah by way of filing representation as contained in Annexure-5 which is pending consideration before the respondent-District Programme Officer, Establishment, Nawadah.

Since the respondents have not assigned any reason for

Patna High Court CWJC No.1467 of 2018(2) dt.16-02-2018 2/2 stoppage of salary and the representation of the petitioner has not been disposed of as yet, it would be appropriate to dispose of the writ petition with a direction to the respondent-District Programme Officer, Establishment, Nawadah to examine the claim of the petitioner and if on scrutiny of the relevant record he finds that the appointment of the petitioner is legal and valid and he is regularly working, pass appropriate order for payment of salary. If the respondent No. 6 does not find any merit in the claim of the petitioner for payment of salary, he shall pass reasoned and speaking order within a maximum period of two months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.

With the aforesaid, the writ petition stands disposed of. (Anil Kumar Upadhyay, J) spandey/- U