Jay Prakash v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.10821 of 2016 =========================================================== Jay Prakash, Son of Chandra Bhushan Prasad Singh, Resident of village - Sultanpur, P.O. Hassori, P.S. + District - Sheikhpura .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

2. The Principal Secretary, Department of Education, Government of Bihar, Patna

3. The Director Primary Education, Education Department Government of Bihar, Patna

4. The Joint Director, Primary Education, Government of Bihar, Patna

5. The District Magistrate, Sheikhpura, District Sheikhpura (Bihar)

6. Takuddin Ahmed, the District Education officer, District Sheikhpura (Bihar)

7. Chandra Bhushan Lal, The District Programme officer (Establishment) Department of Education, District Sheikhpura ( Bihar )

8. National Council for Teacher Education, Southern Regional Committee through its Regional Director Jhana Bharti Campus Road, Opp National Law School, Nagara Bhari, Banglore 560072

9. The Regional Director National Council for Teacher Education, Southern Region, Jhana Bharti Campus Road, Opp National Law School, Nagarabhari Bangalore

10. The Principal, Rajaji College of Education, Post Graduate and Research Institute, Dakshin Bharat Hindi Prachav Sabha Madras, Myagaraya Nagar, Chennai - 600017

11. Executive officer, Panchayat Samiti - Cum - Member Secretary Prakhand Niyojan Ekai, Chewara ( Shiekhpura ), Bihar .... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Lalan Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Sheo Shankar Prasad- SC10 =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPADHYAY ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 23-04-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and State. Considering the stand taken by the respondent in para 8 of supplementary counter affidavit that Rs. Five lakh sixty two thousand and odd has been credited in the Bank account of the

Patna High Court CWJC No.10821 of 2016 dt.23-04-2018 2/2 petitioner, it appears that there is no issue as to entitlement of the petitioner. It is only a matter of calculation of the dues of the petitioner.

Learned counsel for the petitioner with reference to supplementary affidavit submits that more than two lakhs are still outstanding.

Without making any comment on the claim of the petitioner, the writ application is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to work out the total entitlement of the petitioner and to ensure payment of arrears as well as current salary, if not already paid, within a maximum period of three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.

With the aforesaid, the writ application stands disposed of.

(Anil Kumar Upadhyay, J) Uday/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date25.04.2018 Transmission Date