Pradip Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.194 of 2026 ====================================================== 1.

Pradip Kumar Son of Late Prabhu Narayan Das, Resident of House No. 40/400, Road No. 2, Rajbanshi Nagar, PS- Shastri Nagar, Patna- 800023. 2.

Binod Kumar Ranjan, Son of Late Bhuletan Pandit, Resident of Rajrani Niwas Budh Vihar Colony, Sipara Dih (East), Post- Dhelwan, PS Beur, Distt.- Patna (Bihar)- 800020.

3.

Puja, W/o- Sri Sandeep Kumar Singh, Resident of Mohalla- Indrapuri, Patna (Bihar)-800024.

4.

Rakesh Kumar, S/o- Late Jagdish Prasad Singh, Resident of Village and Post- Basudeopur Chandel, Distt- Vaishali (Bihar)- 844501. 5.

Bishwanath Ram, S/o- Sri Jay Narayan Ram, Resident of Village PostNirmali, PS- Pipra, Distt. Supaul (Bihar)- 852132. 6.

Brajesh Dutt Kumar, S/o- Sri Ganesh Dutt Kumar, Resident of Indira Nagar, Road No.-4, Postal Park, Patna (Bihar)- 800001. 7.

Kumud Ranjan, S/o- Sri Chhotelal Paswan, Resident of Village and POMahwa, Distt.- Muzaffarpur (Bihar)- 843111. 8.

Anil Kumar, S/o- Sri Sidhnath Prasad, Resident of Purani Masjid Road, Paliganj, Patna (Bihar)-801110.

9.

Md. Shakeel Ahmed, S/o- Mohammed Stamim Ahmed, Resident of- In front of Gangotri Iron and Steel Factory, Prakash Nagar, Khagaul Road, Phulwarisharif, Patna, 801505.

10.

Deepak Kumar, Son of Late Ramu Prasad Keshari, Resident of Gola Road, Imambara Gali, Nawadah Bihar, 805110.

11.

Sanjay Kumar, S/o- Late Sachindanand Prasad, Resident of Village Saraiyapar, PO- Paithana, PS- Islampur, Distt.- Nalanda (Bihar)- 801303. 12.

Rajnish Kumar Sinha, S/o- Sri V. N. Sharma, Resident of Village and PostMau, Distt.- Patna, 800001. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Bihar, Patna. 2.

The Development Commissioner-cum-Chairman, Bihar State Road Development Corporation, Bihar, Patna.

3.

The Secretary, Road Construction Department, Bihar, Patna. 4.

The Additional Chief Secretary, General Administration Department, Bihar, Patna.

5.

The Principle Secretary, Finance Department, Bihar, Patna. 6.

The Managing Director, Bihar State Road Development Corporation Ltd, Bihar Patna.

7.

The Chief General Manager, Bihar State Road Development Corporation Limited, Bihar, Patna.

2/4 ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Archana Sinha, Sr. Adv.

Ms. Swarna Roy, Adv.

Mr. Kanishk Kaustubh, Adv.

Ms. Lakshmi Kumar, Adv.

For the Corporation :

Mr. P.K. Shashi, A.G.

Mr.Anil Kumar Singh, GP-26 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEEN KUMAR ORAL ORDER 31-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel appearing for the State as well as Corporation.

2. The petitioner has preferred this writ application with the following reliefs;

"I. For issuance of direction to the Respondent Authorities to comply the direction of the Board of Directors of the BSRDCL in it's 34th Board Meeting held on 20.04.2017 and to consider and reconstruction the salary structure of contactual employees of BSRDCL including the petitioners to match the same of and make it equivalent to the salary of regular employees of Government of Bihar.

II. The petitioner further prays that after consideration of the aforementioned direction of the Board of Directors of the BSRDCL grant similar pay, and pay all consequential benefits with effect from the date of direction of the Board of Directors. III. For any other relief/reliefs for which the petitioner may be deemed entitled to."

3. Mrs. Sinha, learned counsel for the petitioners

3/4 submits that the petitioners have approached the concerned authority by way of several representations with respect to their claim, however, no decision has been taken on the representation of the petitioners as yet. She further confined her prayer to the extent that the representations of the petitioners annexed as annexure-P/8 series to the writ application may be directed to be decided by the concerned authorities in accordance with law within a reasonable time.

4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents does not oppose the submission advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner.

5. Taking into consideration the submission putforth by the learned counsel for the petitioners and taking into consideration the fact that the representations of the petitioner are pending consideration before the respondent authority as yet, this Court deems it fit to dispose of this writ petition at this stage itself directing the petitioners to file a fresh representation raising all the grounds as raised in this writ application with all supporting documents with respect to their claim, annexing all the representations filed earlier, which are at P/8 (series) to the writ application, within a period of two weeks from today. Upon such representation is

4/4 filed, the concerned respondent shall consider the representation of the petitioner and decide it by passing a reasoned and speaking order, in accordance with law, preferably within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of a copy of the order of this Court, which shall be communicated to the petitioner forthwith.

7. Accordingly, with the aforesaid observation and direction, the writ petition stands disposed of. (Praveen Kumar, J) brajesh/- U