Bhim Sharma Vs The State of Bihar

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.20867 of 2025

¶2

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

¶3

Bhim Sharma son of Ram Balak Sharma, resident of Village- Uchirma, P.S. Sherghati, District- Gaya Jee.

¶4

Kanchan Sharma son of Ramat Sharma, resident of Village-Bhori, P.S.Tekari, District-Gaya Jee.

¶5

Ram Vinay Sharma son of Jugal Sharma, resident of Village-Bhori, P.S.Tekari, District- Gaya Jee.

¶6

Rajeshwar Prasad son of Sita Ram Sharma, resident of Village-Baijal Tetariya, P.S.-Muffasil Gayajee, District- Gaya Jee.

¶7

Narendra Deo Chaturvedi son of Kameshwar Sharma, resident of VillageMushi, P.S.-Tekari, District- Gaya Jee.

¶8

Dinesh Sharma son of Ram Nandan Sharma, resident of Village-Bhori, P.S.Mushi, District- Gaya Jee.

¶9

Indu Devi wife of Ravindra Sharma, resident of Village -Keshsaw Bigha, P.S.-Tekari, District- Gaya Jee.

¶10

Ajeet Kumar son of Ram Naresh Sharma @ Ramnaresh Sharma, resident of Village-Ganga Chak, Police Station-Bikram, District-Patna.

¶11

Rinku Kumari wife of Rajesh Kumar, resident of Village -Mushi, P.S.Tekari, District-Gaya Jee.

¶12

... ... Petitioner/s

¶13

Versus

¶14

The State of Bihar through Principal Secretary, Human Resources Development Department Government of Bihar, Vikash Bhawan, Patna.

¶15

The Special Director, Secondary Education, Incharge Sanskrit, Education Department, Government of Bihar, Vikash Bhawan, Patna.

¶16

The Bihar Sanskrit Shiksha Board, Bihar, Patna through its Secretary.

¶17

The Chairman, Bihar Sanskrit Shiksha Board, Bihar, Patna.

¶18

The Secretary, the Bihar Sanskrit Shiksha Board, Bihar, Patna.

¶19

The District Education Officer, Gaya, District- Gaya Jee.

¶20

The District Programme Officer, Establishment, Gaya, District- Gaya Jee.

¶21

... ... Respondent/s

¶22

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Suresh Kumar Ishwar, Adv. For the Respondent/s : Mr. Government Pleader (18) : Mr. Navnit Kumar, Ac to Gp18 For the Board : Mr. Satyam Shivam Sundaram, Adv. : Mr. Ankit, Adv. : Mr. Aman Kumar, Adv. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA

¶23

Patna High Court CWJC No.20867 of 2025(2) dt.06-01-2026

2/3

ORAL ORDER

2 06-01-2026

The petitioner nos. 1 to 6 were appointed as Assistant Teacher in Sanskrit School and the husband of petitioner nos. 7 and 9 and father of petitioner no. 8 were also appointed as teachers.

¶28

The writ application has been filed for a direction to the respondents to grant pay scale under 5th and 6th pay revision to the petitioners in terms of the judgment, dated 13.08.2019, passed in L.P.A. No. 43 of 2016 and analogous cases.

¶29

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that Division Bench of this court in similar circumstances directed the respondent/authorities in the Education Department to grant benefits of revisional pay scale of 5th and 6th pay revision to the teachers and non-teaching staffs of the non-government recognized (aided) sanskrit schools in the same manner as allowed to the teachers and non-teaching staffs of the government schools together with dearness allowance as admissible thereon.

¶30

Learned counsel for the State as well as Bihar Sanskrit Shiksha Board submits that the relief prayed for in this writ application is covered by the aforesaid Division Bench judgment.

¶31

Having heard learned counsel for the parties, taking

¶32

Patna High Court CWJC No.20867 of 2025(2) dt.06-01-2026 3/3

¶33

into consideration the nature of prayer made in this writ application, the present writ application is disposed with liberty to the petitioners to file a detailed representation along with copy of the judgment passed in L.P.A. No. 43 of 2016 before the respondent no. 7 / District Programme Officer, Establishment, Gaya, District- Gaya Jee within a period of one month.

¶34

It is made clear that if representation is filed by the petitioners, the same shall be disposed by the respondent no. 7 in the light of the judgment passed in L.P.A. No. 43 of 2016 within a period of three months from the date of filing of the representation.

¶35

It is made clear that if the claim of the petitioners has been found admissible by respondent no. 7, the consequential financial benefits shall be paid to the petitioners / legal heirs within a period of one month from the date of disposal of representation.

¶36

With the aforesaid direction and obsersation, the present writ application stands disposed.

¶37

(Anil Kumar Sinha, J)

¶38

HarshPandey/- U

Bhim Sharma v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bhim Sharma 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

Achal Kumar Mishra Vs The State of Bihar

Primary Agriculture Credit Co-operative Society, Vs The State of Bihar

Rajendra Prasad Vs The State of Bihar

Anil Kumar Ray and Ors. Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Daya Shankar Prasad Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Raj Nath Singh Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.