Ramashish Prasad Sinha And ORS v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.16774 of 2016 ======================================================

1. Ramashish Prasad Sinha, Son of Late Ram Dinesh Prasad Sinha, resident of Krishna Cottage Udantpuri Garhpar, P.S. Biharsharif, District Nalanda.

2. Basant Prasad Singh, Son of Late Ayodhya Prasad Singh, resident of Village- Kulti, P.S. Asthawan, District- Nalanda.

3. Balmukund Prasad, son of Nageshwar Singh, resident of VillagePyarepur, P.S.- Giriyak, District- Nalanda .... Petitioners

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

2. The Secretary Education Department Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

3. The Director, Secondary Education, New Secretariat, Patna.

4. The Regional Deputy Director, Patna.

5. The District Education Officer, Nalanda.

6. The Accountant General Bihar, Patna .... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioners : Mr. Pankaj Kumar, Adv. For the State : Mrs. Sunil Kumar, AC to GA XII For the AG : Mr. Bindhyachal Rai, Adv. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPADHYAY ORAL ORDER 13-02-2018 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel appearing for the State.

In the present writ application counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the Accountant General. No counter affidavit was filed on behalf of the officials of the State in response to the averments made in the writ application.

This writ application was filed with two advance copies of the writ application serving in the office of the Advocate General on 26.09.2016 for facilitating to file the counter affidavit yet no counter affidavit has been filed.

From the averments made in the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the Accountant General particularly in paragraph 6, it appears that office of the Accountant General has requested

Patna High Court CWJC No.16774 of 2016 (2) dt.13-02-2018 2/2 the department to furnish the details with regard to action taken by the respondent State authorities in the matter of granting revised pay scale after giving one increment in terms of 6th Pay Revision Commission Report.

In view of the above, the respondents-authorities particularly respondent no. 5 is directed to take final decision with regard to the entitlement of the petitioners as to grant of one increment on grant of benefit of 6th Pay Revision. Respondent no. 5 is directed to take final decision within a maximum period of sixty days, from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order, along with a copy of the order of this Court. The respondents are also required to ensure monetary benefit to the petitioners if the respondents determine the entitlement of the petitioners as to one increment on account of 6th Pay Revision Commission, within a period of two months from the date of such decision.

With the aforesaid observations, this writ application stands disposed of.

(Anil Kumar Upadhyay, J) SA/- U