Ganpati Mehta v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.6394 of 2025 ====================================================== Ganpati Mehta, S/o- Late Ramjee Mahto, Resident of Village- Lakshmipur, Kawadpur, P.S- Manikpur (Surajgarha), District- Lakhisarai. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through the Additional Chief Secretary, Panchayat Raj Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

2.

The District Magistrate, Lakhisarai, District- Lakhisarai. 3.

The District Panchayat Raj Officer, Lakhisarai. 4.

The Block Development Officer, Block- Chanan, District- Lakhisarai. 5.

The Service Grievance Redressal Officer, Lakhisarai. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Siya Ram Shahi, Adv.

Mr. Shashi Saurabh, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr. M.N.H. Khan, SC-1 Ms. Babita Kumari, AC to SC-1 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 29-04-2025 Heard the parties.

2. Notwithstanding the fact that the petitioner superannuated long back on 31.01.2021 as Panchayat Secretary, when he has not been paid his salary for the month of February, 2012, May, 2016 to June, 2019 and September, 2019 to December, 2020; apart from his case has not been considered for grant of financial progression, he has approached this Court by filing the present writ petition.

3. Mr. Siya Ram Shahi, learned Advocate for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner after rendering his unblemished service, superannuated on 31.01.2021 from the

Patna High Court CWJC No.6394 of 2025(2) dt.29-04-2025 2/3 post of Panchayat Secretary. However, for want of verification of service record, the petitioner has not been extended his salary for the period afore-noted. Referring to letter no.165 dated 09.02.2024 as contained in Annexure-P/2, it is submitted that the Block Development Officer, Chanan wrote to the District Panchayat Raj Officer, Lakhisarai, admitting the position that the petitioner has not been extended his salary for the aforenoted period for want of verification of service record. Aggrieved with the inaction of the respondent(s), the petitioner also approached Service Grievance Redressal Officer, Lakhisarai, who also look into the matter and directed the Block Development Officer, Chanan to extend salary to the petitioner for the period afore-noted but to no avail; hence, the petitioner left with no option but to approach this Court. It is also contended that the petitioner was duly appointed on 27.02.1997 and superannuated on 31.01.2021, but he has never been extended the benefit of 1st ACP and 2nd MACP.

4. Learned Advocate for the State prays for a short adjournment to seek instruction and apprise this Court with regard to the present position.

5. Considering the nature of the grievance and the materials available on record, which explicitly suggest that

Patna High Court CWJC No.6394 of 2025(2) dt.29-04-2025 3/3 salary of the petitioner for the period from February, 2012, May, 2016 to June, 2019 and September, 2019 to December, 2020 could not be paid on account of verification of service record, this Court thinks it apt and proper to dispose off the writ petition with a direction to the District Magistrate, Lakhisarai to look into the matter and direct the Block Development Officer, Chanan to ensure payment of all admissible salary as also consider the case of the petitioner for financial progression under the ACP/MACP scheme, preferably within a period of twelve weeks' from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.

6. The writ petition stands disposed off with the aforesaid direction.

(Harish Kumar, J) rohit/- U