Om Prakash Gupta And ORS v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No 7512 of 2015 ====================================================== 1.

Om Prakash Gupta, SON OF LATE MUNSHI SAH. RESIDENT OF VILLAGE - MODIHA, P.S. - DARIYAT, DISTRICT - SASARAM AT ROHTAS BIHAR AT PRESENT POSTED AS REVENUE KARMACHARI, ANCHAL- DEO , GOH, OBRA, DISTRICTAURANGABAD BIHAR. 2.

SURENDRA KUMAR SINGH, SON OF LATE LALIT KISHORE PRASAD. RESIDENT OF VILLAGE - BELAWA, P.S. - WAZIRGANJ, DISTRICT - GAYA BIHAR AT PRESENT POSTED AS REVENUE KARMACHARI, ANCHAL- DEO, OBRA, DISTRICT - AURANGABAD BIHAR.

3.

SHAILENDRA KUMAR SINGH, SON OF LATE KAULESHWAR PRASAD SINGH. RESIDENT OF VILLAGE - JASOLA, P.S. - AURANGABAD, DISTRICT- AURANGABAD BIHAR AT PRESENT POSTED AS REVENUE KARMACHARI, ANCHAL- DEO, GOH, OBRA, DISTRICT- AURANGABAD BIHAR.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State Of Bihar through the Collector, Aurangabad 2.

THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA.

3.

THE COLLECTOR, AURANGABAD, DISTRICT - AURANGABAD BIHAR.

4.

THE ADDITIONAL COLLECTOR, IN-CHARGE REVENUE, AURANGABAD, DISTRICT -AURANGABAD BIHAR.

5.

THE CIRCLE OFFICER, ANCHAL - GOH, DISTRICT - AURANGABAD. BIHAR.

6.

THE CIRCLE OFFICER, ANCHAL - OBRA, DISTRICT - AURANGABAD. BIHAR.

7.

THE CIRCLE OFFICER, ANCHAL - DEO, DISTRICT - AURANGABAD. BIHAR.

... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

M/s Jitendra Pd Singh, Prabhat Kr Dipak, Advs For the Respondent/s :

Mr Deepak Sahay Jamuar, AC to AAG IV

Patna High Court CWJC No.7512 of 2015 dt.14-05-2019 2/3 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 14-05-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the respondent-State.

2 Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners, who were working as Revenue Karamchari, are entitled to the salary of Rs 34,800/- on account of 06th Pay Revision Commission Recommendation. The claim has been asserted by saying that other Revenue Karamcharis are drawing the salary in the reconstructed scale as Rs 34,800/-. Petitioners have alleged discrimination in the matter of grant of benefit under the 06th Pay Revision Commission Recommendation. 3 The same has specifically been denied by the respondents in the counter affidavit. They have taken a stand that the due salary of the petitioners and other Revenue Karamchari is in the pay scale of Rs 5,200/- to Rs 20,200/- and Grade Pay of Rs 1,900/-. They have specifically asserted that the Revenue Karamcharis, who have joined the service along with the petitioners, are not drawing their salary in the revised structure of Rs 34,800/- which was the grievance of the petitioners.

Patna High Court CWJC No.7512 of 2015 dt.14-05-2019 3/3 4 The specific case asserted by the State is that there is no discrimination as all Revenue Karamcharis, including the petitioners, who joined services at the same time, are in the same pay band of Rs 5,200/- to Rs 20,200/- and Grade Pay of Rs 1,900/-. The assertion of the State is sufficient to conclude that the case of discrimination made out by the petitioners is not correct. 5 The respondents have shown parity in the matter of grant of benefits under 06th Pay Revision Commission Recommendation by filing a specific counter affidavit after due service on the petitioners in the year, 2017 itself. Till date, there is no rejoinder or reply. The stand of the State is not denied or disputed by the petitioner.

6 This writ petition is thus devoid of merit and the same is dismissed.

(Madhuresh Prasad, J) M.E.H./- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date 27.05.2019 Transmission Date NA