Disposed

Uday Kant Singh v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC26 Feb 2024CWJC/7436/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of the petitioner's application seeking arrears of salary and grants. It observed that a statutory alternative remedy exists under the Bihar Anudanit Shikshan Sansthan Paradhikar Niyamawali 2015 and granted liberty for legal recourse. Judgment dated 26-02-2024.

What did the court decide?

Application disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to take legal recourse under Anudanit Pradhikar.

Uday Kant Singh Vs The State of Bihar — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Patna HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.7436 of 2019

¶2

======================================================

¶3

Uday Kant Singh Son of Late Jay Ram Singh Resident of Village-Atmiganj, Ward No.8, Police Station-Nasariganj, District-Rohtas

¶4

... ... Petitioner/s

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Department of Education.

¶7

The Principal Secretary, Department of Education, Government of Bihar, New Secretariat, Patna.

¶8

The Director, Secondary Education, New Secretariat, Patna.

¶9

The Regional Deputy Director of Secondary Education, Rohtas at Sasaram.

¶10

The District Magistrate, Rohtas at Sasaram.

¶11

The District Education Officer, Rohtas at Sasaram.

¶12

The District Programme Officer, Rohtas at Sasaram.

¶13

The Bihar School Examination Board through its Chairman.

¶14

The Secretary, Bihar School Examination Board, Patna

¶15

The Principal Indu-Tapeshwar Singh Mahila College, Bikramganj, Rohtas, Sasaram

¶16

... ... Respondent/s

¶17

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Shailendra Kumar Jha, Adv. For the BSEB Ms. Binita Singh, Adv. For the State : Mr. Madhaw Prasad Yadav, G.P.-23 Mr. Rajesh Kumar Sinha, AC to GP-23 For the Resp. No. 10 Mr. Sunil Kumar Singh, Adv.

¶18

======================================================

¶19

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL JUDGMENT

¶20

Date : 26-02-2024

¶21

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶22

The present application has been filed for the

¶23

following reliefs:-

¶24

I. For issuance of an appropriate writ or writs, order or orders, direction or directions to the respondent especially the respondents no. 8 and 9 to give order to the respondent no. 10 to make

¶25

Patna High Court CWJC No.7436 of 2019 dt.26-02-2024 2/3

¶26

payment of annual grants of the petitioner for the year 2007-2008 and 2008-2009 and salary from February 2018 till today.

¶27

II. For further grant of any other relief or reliefs to which the petitioner is legally entitled to in the facts and circumstances of the case.

¶28

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

¶29

the petitioner was initially appointed as a Typist by the Governing Body of Indu Tapeshwar Singh Mahila College, Bikramganj, Rohtas on 27.09.1990. The College had issued a list of teaching as well as non-teaching staffs of the college on 25.12.2003 according to which the name of the petitioner appears at serial no. 23. Petitioner is being paid his payment and other grants regularly but the respondent no. 10 stopped his payment of grants of the year 2007-08 and 2008-09 and salary from February 2018 till today for no fault on his part.

¶30

A counter affidavit has been on behalf of the respondent no. 7 in which it is stated that this writ petition is not maintainable because the State Government vide Notification No. 972 dated 19.05.2015 has framed a rule namely ‘Bihar Anudanit Shikshan Sansthan Paradhikar Niyamawali 2015’ (hereinafter referred to as ‘Anudanit Pradhikar) under which the

¶31

Patna High Court CWJC No.7436 of 2019 dt.26-02-2024 3/3

¶32

teachers and employees and the Managing Committees of such Grant-in-aid schools/colleges/institutions can approach to the Anudanit Pradhikar for redressal of their grievances. Learned counsel for the respondent no. 7 further submits that a statutory alternative remedy is available to the petitioner under Clause 11 of the aforesaid Rule, therefore, petitioner without exhausting the alternative remedy cannot directly move to this Court.

¶33

Considering the argument made on behalf of the parties and perusal of the materials available on record, this application is disposed of with a liberty to the petitioner to take legal recourse as available in accordance with law.

¶34

(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J)

¶35

devendra/-

¶36

AFR/NAFR	NAFR
CAV DATE	NA
Uploading Date	27.02.2024
Transmission Date	NA

Uday Kant Singh v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Uday Kant Singh v. The State of Bihar

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

Ajay Singh @ Bhopali @ Mopali @ Mopali Singh @ Nepali Vs The State of Bihar

Anjan Kumar Vs the State of Bihar

Vivek Kumar @ Vivek Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Jaynandan Singh @ Jainandan Prasad Singh and Ors. Vs The State of Bihar

Ashiya Praween Vs The State of Bihar

Ramanand Singh Vs The State of Bihar