Dismissed¶37

Md. Tahir Hussain v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC23 Jun 2026CWJC/11374/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Post retiral benefits denied to Madarsa teacher; arrears of salary from date of affiliation; Bihar State Madarsa Education Board affiliation 01.10.1987; Non-Government Recognized Aided Sanskrit Schools and Madarsas; employees of private managing committees not government employees; honorarium Rs. 9,000/- enhanced to Rs. 18,250/-; LPA No. 43 of 2016 Baidyanath Jha Vs. State of Bihar followed; Krishna Kumar Singh (2017) 3 SCC 1 referred; writ petition dismissed with liberty to approach authority for honorarium claim; Patna High Court CWJC No. 11374 of 2023; Harish Kumar, J.; NAFR.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed; no substantive relief. Petitioner left at liberty to approach the authority concerned for consideration of any honorarium grievance, in accordance with law. ¶37

Md. Tahir Hussain Vs The State of Bihar — Patna HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Writ petition dismissed; no substantive relief. Petitioner left at liberty to approach the authority concerned for consideration of any honorarium grievance, in accordance with law.

¶37

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner is entitled to arrears of salary from the date of affiliation granted to Madarsa Islamia Miskinia. +1 more

¶25

Court's answer

On the honorarium/arrears limb, the Court left the point open: if the petitioner still has any grievance with regard to honorarium for any period, he is at liberty to approach the authority concerned, who shall consider his claim in accordance with law.

¶38

Ratio / Principle

Consistent with the Division Bench decision in Baidyanath Jha (LPA No. 43 of 2016), which held that teaching and non-teaching staff of Non-Government Recognized Aided Sanskrit Schools and Madarsas run by private managing committees are not entitled to post retiral benefits, this Court found no merit in the writ petition with respect to payment of post retiral benefit, and accordingly dismissed the writ petition.

¶37

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Patna High Court (Harish Kumar, J., oral judgment dated 23-06-2026, NAFR) dismissed a writ petition by a retired Assistant Teacher of Madarsa Islamia Miskinia, Araria, who sought arrears of salary from the date of the Madarsa's affiliation by the Bihar State Madarsa Education Board (01.10.1987) and post retiral dues upon superannuation in November 2020. Following the Division Bench decision in Baidyanath Jha Vs. The State of Bihar & Ors., LPA No. 43 of 2016 - which, noting the Supreme Court Constitution Bench judgment in Krishna Kumar Singh, (2017) 3 SCC 1, declined superannuation benefits to teaching and non-teaching staff of Non-Government Recognized Aided Sanskrit Schools and Madarsas on the ground that such schools are run by private managing committees and the staff cannot be held to be government employees - the Court held the claim for post retiral benefit devoid of merit and dismissed the petition. As regards honorarium (paid at Rs. 9,000/- per month from 01.09.2015, raised to Rs. 18,250/- till retirement at age 62), the petitioner was left at liberty to approach the authority concerned, who was to consider any grievance in accordance with law. No Act or section was cited; reliance was placed on a departmental letter (No. 162 dated 15.02.2011) and a departmental circular (Memo No. 670 dated 07.09.2019).

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.11374 of 2023

¶2

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

¶3

Md. Tahir Hussain Son of Shamsher Ali Resident of Village- Bhuna Ward No. 11, Police Station- Jokihat, District- Araria.

¶4

... ... Petitioner/s

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Bihar through the Additional Chief Secretary cum Principal Secretary, Department of Education, Government of Bihar, Patna.

¶7

The Special Director (Urdu), Department of Education, Government of Bihar, Patna.

¶8

The District Magistrate, District- Araria.

¶9

The District Education Officer, District- Araria.

¶10

The District Programme Officer (Establishment), District- Araria.

¶11

The Block Education Officer, Jokihat, District- Araria.

¶12

The Chairman, Bihar State Madarsa Education Board, Patna.

¶13

The Secretary, Bihar State Madarsa Education Board, Patna.

¶14

The President, Madarsa Islamia Miskinia, At and P.O.- Bhona, ViaGarhbanaili, District- Araria.

¶15

The Secretary, Madarsa Islamia Miskinia, At and P.O.- Bhona, ViaGarhbanaili, District- Araria.

¶16

... ... Respondent/s

¶17

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Dhirendra Kumar Jha, Adv. For the Respondent/s : Mr. Kameshwar Kumar, GP-17 Mr. Sanjay Kumar, AC to GP-17 For the Madarsa Board : Mr. Shahzad Hussain Khan, Adv. Mr. Md. Aslam Ansari, Adv.

¶18

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

¶19

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL JUDGMENT

¶20

Date : 23-06-2026

¶21

This Court has heard Mr. Dhirendra Kumar,

¶22

learned Advocate for the petitioner, Mr. Sanjay Kumar learned Advocate for the State and Mr. Md. Aslam Ansari learned Advocate on behalf of Bihar State Madarsa Education Board.

¶23

The petitioner on being aggrieved with the

¶24

Patna High Court CWJC No.11374 of 2023 dt.23-06-2026 2/4

¶25

action of the respondent authorities in not extending the arrears of salary of the petitioner from the date of affiliation granted to the Madarsa Islamia Miskinia as well as the post retiral dues on account of his superannuation in the month of November 2020 has approached this Court.

¶26

A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondent no. 5 the District Programme Officer, Establishment, Araria. It is submitted by learned Advocate for the State that the petitioner was duly appointed as an Assistant Teacher on 01.09.1979 by the Managing Committee of Madarsa Islamia Miskinia, which was established in the year 1979. The said Madarsa got affiliation from the Bihar State Madarsa Education Board, Patna on 01.10.1987. In the light of the Education Department Letter No. 162 dated 15.02.2011, the District Education Officer, Araria made a spot enquiry of the State Madarsa and submitted its report.

¶27

Accordingly, the Madarsa Islamia Miskinia, Bhona came in the list of selected 609 Madarsa of Bihar for Government Aid vide Departmental Circular under Memo No. 670 dated 07.09.2019. In the light of the Departmental Circular, the petitioner has been paid an honorarium of Rs. 9,000/- per month with effect from 01.09.2015 and further the honorarium

¶28

Patna High Court CWJC No.11374 of 2023 dt.23-06-2026 3/4

¶29

was increased to Rs. 18,250/- which was paid to the petitioner till his retirement at the age of 62. It is categorically submitted that the there remains no arrears remain so far the salary to the petitioner is concerned.

¶30

Learned Advocate for the respondent further drew the attention of this Court to the decision passed by the learned Division Bench of this Court in LPA No. 43 of 2016 and submitted that as per policy decision of the Government, the teachers and non-teaching employees of the Non-Government Recognized Aided Sanskrit Schools and Madarsas are not entitled for any post retiral benefits.

¶31

This Court has considered the submissions advanced by learned Advocate for the respective parties and perused the averments made in the counter affidavit as well as the judgment rendered by learned Division Bench of this Court in LPA No. 43 of 2016 ( Baidyanath Jha Vs. The State of Bihar & Ors. and other analogous cases ), where the Court held as

¶32

follows:-

¶33

“We, however, bearing note of the Constitution bench judgment of the Supreme Court rendered in the case of Krishna Kumar Singh {(2017) 3 SCC 1} are not persuaded to allow the payment of superannuation benefits to these teaching and non-teaching staff in these schools (the NonGovernment Recognized Aided Sanskrit Schools and Madarsas) because they are

¶34

Patna High Court CWJC No.11374 of 2023 dt.23-06-2026 4/4

¶35

employees of the schools run by the private managing committees and thus cannot held government emloyees for such admissibility.”

¶36

In view of the aforesaid facts and the position in

¶37

law, this Court does not find any merit in the writ petition with respect to the payment of post retiral benefit. Accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed.

¶38

However, if the petitioner still has any grievance with regard to honorarium, for any period, the petitioner shall be at liberty to approach before the authority concerned, who shall consider his claim, in accordance with law.

¶39

(Harish Kumar, J)

¶40

sumit/-

¶41

AFR/NAFR	NAFR
CAV DATE	NA
Uploading Date	24.06.2026
Transmission Date	NA

Md. Tahir Hussain v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Md. Tahir Hussain v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Surya Mohan Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Vir Bahadur Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Tilki Kumari @ Tilki Devi Vs The State of Bihar

Md. Mumtaz Ahmad Vs The State of Bihar

Parshuram Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Sukhdeo Ram Vs The State of Bihar