← Library
Patna High CourtMJC/1690/2016dismissed

Pramod Kumar Dixit v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2018-04-10Justice Smt. Nilu Agrawal,Mr. Justice Ajay Kumar Tripathi2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.1690 of 2016 In Letters Patent Appeal No.1470 of 2014 ====================================================== Pramod Kumar Dixit Son of late Gopal Dixit Resident of Jankisthan, P.S.- Jankisthan, Distt.- Sitamarhi at present working as Assistant Teacher in Sri Janki Sanskrit High School, Sitamarhi ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. Sr. D.S Gangawar, The Commissioner cum Secretary, Education Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna

3. Sri Satya Narayan Paswan,The Deputy Secretary, Education Department, Government of Bihar, Patna

4. Sri Lakshman Jha, The Special Director/Secondary Education/Bihar, Patna

5. Sri Durgesh Kumar Roy, The Chairman, Bihar Sanskrit Siksha Board, Patna

6. Sri Madan Mohan Kumar, The Headmaster, Sri Janki Sanskrit High School, Sitamarhi ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Krishna Kant Tiwari Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Dr. Anand Kumar AC to A.A.G. - 3 For the Board :

Mr. S. S. Sundaram Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI and HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. NILU AGRAWAL ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI) 10-04-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and counsel for the respondent-State.

The order of the Division Bench is unambiguous. The entitlement of salary of the petitioner, who was the appellant in the LPA, was allowed w.e.f. January, 2015, but for the purposes of pension etc. the earlier period from 1995 till 2015 is also

Patna High Court MJC No.1690 of 2016(4) dt.10-04-2018 2/2 required to be counted.

Submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that he should be given increment etc. from 1995 onward, looking at the nature of the order.

That is his interpretation to the order and not the direction of the Court, therefore, no contempt is made out. Contempt Application is dismissed.

(Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J) ( Nilu Agrawal, J) skm/- U