Disposed¶29

Ajay Kumar Jha Ajey v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC9 Jan 2026CWJC/19947/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Salary arrears — mandamus — departmental proceeding — exoneration of all charges — Block Agriculture Officer — non-payment of salary 8.1.2013 to 5.7.2013 despite joining — representations unanswered — writ disposed with directions to file representation before Director, Agriculture Directorate within four weeks — admitted dues payable within two months — reasoned order if rejected — merits not decided.

What did the court decide?

No substantive relief adjudicated; writ application disposed of with directions: petitioner to file a representation before respondent no.2 (Director, Agriculture Directorate) within four weeks; respondent no.2 to decide it and pay admitted dues within two months of filing, and to communicate a reasoned order at the earliest if the representation is rejected; merits expressly left undecided. ¶29

Ajay Kumar Jha Ajey Vs The State of Bihar — Patna HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶29

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, who was exonerated in a departmental proceeding and rejoined duty as Block Agriculture Officer, is entitled to a writ of mandamus directing release/payment of arrears of salary from 08.01.2013 to 04.07.2013 with consequential benefits and admissible interest.

¶17

Court's answer

The Court has not gone into the merits of the petitioner's case; the merits are left to be decided by the respondent concerned.

¶28

Ratio / Principle

The petitioner is directed to file a representation before the Director, Agriculture Directorate, Department of Agriculture, Patna (respondent no.2) within a period of four weeks for the grievances raised in the application.

¶23

Key takeaways

Respondent no.2 shall decide the representation and pay the admitted dues to the petitioner within a period of 2 months from the date of filing of the representation.ratio¶24
If the representation does not find favour with the respondent concerned, a reasoned order shall be communicated to the petitioner at the earliest.ratio¶27

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Patna High Court (Partha Sarthy, J) disposed of a civil writ petition by a Block Agriculture Officer (Block Rahika, District Madhubani) who, after being exonerated of all charges in a departmental proceeding and rejoining duty, sought mandamus for payment of salary arrears for 08.01.2013 to 04.07.2013 with consequential benefits and interest, his representations having elicited no response. Without examining the merits, the Court directed the petitioner to move a representation before the Director, Agriculture Directorate, Patna (respondent no.2) within four weeks; the Director was to decide it and pay the admitted dues within two months of filing, failing acceptance, a reasoned order was to be communicated at the earliest.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.19947 of 2025

¶2

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

¶3

Ajay Kumar Jha Ajey S/o Late Dineshwar Jha Resident of House No.- 233, Road Bhagwanpur, P.S.- Bathnaha, District- Sitamarhi.

¶4

... ... Petitioner/s

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Bihar through the District Magistrate, Darbhanga.

¶7

The Director, Agriculture Directorate, Department of Agriculture, Patna, Bihar.

¶8

The District Agriculture Officer, Darbhanga, Distt.- Darbhanga.

¶9

The Block Development Officer, Ghanshyampur, P.S.- Ghanshyampur, Distt.- Darbhanga.

¶10

... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Krishna Prabhat, Advocate Mr. Subodh Kumar, Advocate Mr. Surendra Kishore Thakur, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Standing Counsel (26) Mr. Tripurari Nath Ambastha, AC to SC-26 ======================================================

¶11

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER

¶12

2 09-01-2026

¶13

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

¶14

counsel for the respondents.

¶15

The petitioner has filed the instant application for

¶16

the following relief(s) :

¶17

“1. That this writ application is being filed on behalf of the petitioner above named for issuance of the writ in the nature of mandamus directing and commanding to the Respondent Authority to release/pay the arrears of salary of the Petitioner from 08.01.2013 to 04.07.2013, with all consequential benefits and admissible interest thereon. And for any other appropriate writ/writs, direction/directions, order/orders as

¶18

Patna High Court CWJC No.19947 of 2025(2) dt.09-01-2026 2/3

¶19

this Hon'ble Court thinks fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of this case.”

¶20

In brief, the case of the petitioner is that while working as a Block Agriculture Officer in Block- Rahika District-Madhubani, the petitioner was proceeded against in a departmental proceeding wherein finally he was exonerated of all the charges. Pursuant thereto he gave his joining.

¶21

It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that inspite of having been exonerated and having joined his service, he has not been paid his salary for the period from 8.1.2013 to 5.7.2013, the date on which he was finally posted. He has not received any response to the various representations filed.

¶22

In view of the nature of grievance raised by the petitioner herein, the Court intends to dispose of the writ application with the following directions :-

¶23

i. The petitioner shall file a representation before the Director, Agriculture Directorate, Department of Agriculture, Patna (respondent no.2) within a period of four weeks for the grievances raised in the instant application.

¶24

ii. The respondent no.2 shall decide the same and pay the admitted dues to the petitioner within a period of 2 months

¶25

Patna High Court CWJC No.19947 of 2025(2) dt.09-01-2026 3/3

¶26

from the date of filing of the representation.

¶27

iii. In case the representation does not find favour with the respondent concerned, a reasoned order shall be communicated to the petitioner at the earliest.

¶28

It is made clear that the Court has not gone into the merits of the case of the petitioner which is to be decided by the respondent concerned.

¶29

The writ application stands disposed of with the above observations and directions.

¶30

(Partha Sarthy, J)

¶31

Shiv/-

¶32

Ajay Kumar Jha Ajey v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ajay Kumar Jha Ajey 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

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rameshwar Sah Vs The State of Bihar

Shambhu Kunvar @ Shambhu Kuer Vs The State of Bihar

Arun Prakash Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Mayur Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Nalini Mohan Singh and Ors. Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Kanchan Kumari and Ors. Vs The Chairman Of The Selection Committee and Ors.