Sudhanshu Kumar v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.19032 of 2010 ======================================================

1. Sudhanshu Kumar S/O Sri Byash Tiwari R/O Vill.-Sabeya, P.O.-Gaura, P.S.-Kateya, Distt.-Gopalganj.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State Of Bihar Through Secretary, Promary Education Bihar, Patna.

2. The Director, Primary Education, Bihar, Patna.

3. The District Magistrate, Gopalganj.

4. The District Superintendent Of Education, Gopalganj.

5. The Block Education Extension Officer, Kuchaikot Prakhand, Distt.- Gopalganj.

6. Block Development Officer, Kuchaikot Prakhand, Distt.-Gopalganj. .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Satyendra Rai For the Respondent/s : Mr. (Aag3) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KISHORE KUMAR MANDAL ORAL ORDER 09-01-2015 Heard Counsels for the petitioner and the State. In spite of indulgence granted by this Court, no counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the State respondents. The petitioner has filed the present writ application for payment of arrears of salary to him from March, 2009 to the date of filing of the application. According to the writ petition, on being selected by the Selection Committee of the concerned Block, he was posted as Prakhand Teacher in Panchdeory Block in the district of Gopalganj. The selection letter has been enclosed as Annexure-1. Pursuant thereto, the petitioner joined in the Upgraded Middle School, Khalgaon, Block- Panchdeori on 30.12.2006 and since then he is working as such. It is further the

Patna High Court CWJC No.19032 of 2010 (3) dt.09-01-2015 contention of the petitioner that till February, 2009, he was paid his salary as Prakhand Teacher but subsequently the payment was stopped without any reason. Stoppage of salary gave an occasion to the petitioner to file the present writ petition. Having heard the parties, in my view, the petitioner should raise a grievance before the appropriate/competent authority enabling him to examine the same and pass appropriate orders thereon. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that in the case of the petitioner, the appropriate/competent authority would be the District Superintendent of Education, Gopalganj who has now been redesignated as District Programme officer (Establishment).

Counsel for the State has also taken a stand that if the salary of the petitioner has been stopped without any valid reason, the petitioner should make a representation in this regard before the said respondent who will examine the same and pass appropriate order in accordance with law.

Let the petitioner file a detailed representation in this regard before the respondent no. 4 within three weeks whereafter the said respondent will examine the same and pass appropriate/ reasoned order as quickly as possible preferably within four weeks from such filing/presentation.

Patna High Court CWJC No.19032 of 2010 (3) dt.09-01-2015 The writ application is disposed of.

(Kishore Kumar Mandal, J) Pankaj/- U