Appeal against denial of regular pay scale for compassionate appointment recommended post-July 1, 2006. Court granted liberty to approach State Government as per Supreme Court precedent, consigned appeal to records.
Liberty granted to approach the State Government for suitable relief.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Letters Patent Appeal No.1326 of 2018 In
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1684 of 2015
======================================================
Amar Anand, S/o Late Ashok Kumar Yadav, resident of Village- Pipra, P.S. Banmankhi, District- Purnea.
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : For the Respondent/s :
Mr. Rajeev Kumar Singh, Advocate Mr. Ashutosh Ranjan Pandey – A.A.G.15
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA MISHRA ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE)
Date : 28-11-2018
Heard learned Counsel for the appellant and the learned Counsel for the respondents.
We had adjourned the matter day before yesterday to enable learned Counsel for the appellant to assist the Court
Patna High Court LPA No.1326 of 2018 dt.28-11-2018 2/3
keeping in view the judgement relied on by the learned Counsel for the State in the case of Mukesh & Anr. Vs. State of Bihar, reported in (2017) 5 SCC 383.
Paragraph 6 of the said reported judgement is extracted hereinunder:
“ 6. For the foregoing reasons, we direct that the appellants who were recommended for appointment to Class III or Class IV posts prior to 01.07.2006 will either be appointed on Class III or Class IV posts on regular basis or will be entitled for continuance as Teachers on a regular pay scale. The other appellants who were appointed after 01.07.2006 will not be entitled for the relief of regular pay scales. However, we grant them liberty to approach the State Government for suitable relief in terms of the order passed in Rajiv Ranvijay Kumar V. State of Bihar.”
It is undisputed that the appellant is claiming compassionate appointment the recommendations of which relate to a period after 1st of July 2006. In such a situation, the grant of regular pay-scale would not be permissible unless the State Government agrees to the said proposition. Learned Counsel submits that in view of the observations made by the Supreme Court in the above quoted judgement, liberty be given to the appellant as well to approach the State Government. It goes without saying that the aforesaid liberty is available and it is for the State Government to take any appropriate decision.
Patna High Court LPA No.1326 of 2018 dt.28-11-2018 3/3
Consequently, the appeal is consigned to records with
the said observations.
(Amreshwar Pratap Sahi, CJ)
( Anjana Mishra, J)
K.C.Jha/Uma/-
| AFR/NAFR | NAFR |
|---|---|
| CAV DATE | N/A |
| Uploading Date | 01.12.2018 |
| Transmission Date | N/A |
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the appellant is entitled to regular pay scale for compassionate appointment recommendations made after 01.07.2006.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Mukesh & Anr. Vs. State of BiharReferred¶24
, Mukesh & Anr. Vs. State of Bihar, (2017) 5 SCC 383 · Who else cites this
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Amar Anand
State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Education Department, Government of Bihar
District Magistrate, Araria
District Education Officer, Araria
District Programme Officer (Establishment), Araria
Block Development Officer-cum- Member Secretary, Block Teacher Employment Unit, Sikti, District- Araria
Amar Anand
Anjana Mishra
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
