Saroj Kumari v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.837 of 2018 ====================================================== Saroj Kumari, Wife of Shri Ratnesh Mishra, Resident of Guriaao Niyamat, P.O.- Semaria, P.S.- Katya, District- Gopalganj. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through District Magistrate, Gopalganj.

2. District Education Officer, Gopalganj.

3. District Programme Officer, Establishment, Gopalganj.

4. Block Education Officer, Kuchaikot, P.O.+P.S.- Kuchaikot, DistrictGopalganj.

5. Panchayat Secretary, Gram Panchayat Raj, Sasamusa, P.O.- Sasamusa, P.S.- Kuchaikot, District- Gopalganj.

6. Headmaster New Primary School, Mahiyara, Anchal- Kuchaikot, DistrictGopalganj. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Bipin Bihari singh, Advocate Mr. S.K. Ranjan, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Prabhat Ranjan Jha- AAG15 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPADHYAY ORAL ORDER 31-01-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the counsel appearing on behalf of the State.

The grievance of the petitioner in the present writ petition is non-payment of salary since July, 2017.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was legally and validly appointed and he is regularly discharging the duty.

He submits that in view of the aforesaid, the writ petition may be disposed of with direction to the respondent, District Programme Officer (Establishment), Gopalganj to ensure payment of arrears and current salary to the petitioner.

Patna High Court CWJC No.837 of 2018(2) dt.31-01-2018 2/2 Without going into the controversy whether the appointment of the petitioner is legal and valid, the writ petition is disposed of with direction to the respondent nos. 3 to 6 to examine the claim of the petitioner and if it is found that the appointment of the petitioner is legal and valid and the petitioner is regularly working, the respondent nos. 3 to 6 are required to ensure payment of the petitioner arrears of salary as well as current salary within a maximum period of three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. In case, the respondents find any justification for nonpayment they must assign reasons for refusal to make payment by a reasoned-speaking order.

With the aforesaid, the writ petition stand disposed of . (Anil Kumar Upadhyay, J) Ravi/- U