Disposed

Binay Kashyap v. the State of Bihar and Ors.

Patna HC18 Dec 2013MJC/2325/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court disposed of a miscellaneous petition where the petitioner's reinstatement and monetary benefits were already granted. It directed the District Programme Officer to consider the petitioner's representation and pay the pending salary difference.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the District Programme Officer (Establishment), West Champaran, Motihari to consider the petitioner's representation and pay the salary difference of August 2010 to June 2013 within two m

Binay Kashyap Vs the State of Bihar and Ors. — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Patna HC (2013)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.2325 of 2012

¶2

====================================================== Binay Kashyap @ Vinay Kashyap, son of Late Rameshwar Pd. Singh, Resident of Village & P.O. Bhorahan, P.S. Shyampur Bhatahan, DistrictSheohar

¶3

.... .... Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Bihar through the Secretary-cum-Commissioner, Secondary Education, Government of Bihar, Patna, namely, Sri Anjani Kumar Singh 2. The Director, Secondary Education, Government of Bihar, Patna, namely Sri Kamal Kishore Sinha

¶4

The Regional Deputy Director of Education, Tirhut Region, Muzaffarpur, namely, Sri Ranjit Singh 4. The District Education Officer, East Champaran Motihari, namely, Sri Shailendra Kumar

¶5

.... .... Opposite Parties ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner : Mr. Anil Kumar, Advocate For Opposite Parties : Mr. S.K. Sharma GA3

¶6

Mr. Mayank Rukhiyar, AC to GA 3

¶7

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANANDAN SINGH ORAL ORDER

¶8

5 18-12-2013 Learned counsel for the petitioner accepts that in compliance to the orders of this Court, services of the petitioner have been reinstated and he has been granted all the monetary benefits, except difference of salary of the period August, 2010 to June, 2013, to which he was entitled on account of revision of his pay-scale.

¶9

Since only one item remains which is consequence of compliance of the orders of this Court, opposite parties are required to consider that claim of the petitioner also.

¶10

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that for this purpose, petitioner has already filed representation before the

¶11

Patna High Court MJC No.2325 of 2012 (5) dt.18-12-2013

¶12

2/2

¶13

District Programme Officer (Establishment), West Champaran, Motihari.

¶14

This application is, accordingly, disposed of with a direction to the District Programme Officer (Establishment), West Champaran, Motihari to consider representation of the petitioner and find out the difference of salary of period August, 2010 to June, 2013 and pay the same positively within two months from

¶15

the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.

¶16

(Jayanandan Singh, J)

¶17

B.T/-

Binay Kashyap v. the State of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Binay Kashyap v. the State of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rahmatullah Vs The Regional Manager Cum Authorised Officer Central Bank Of India and Ors.

Jai Matadee Construction Contractor Pvt. Ltd. Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Gauri Shankar Prasad Gupta Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Pratibha Sinha and Ors. Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Dr. Mridula Kumari Vs the T.M.Bhagalpur University and Ors.

Jag Bali Singh Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.