Patna High Court

Sitaram TrivedyversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 29 January 2026
Disposal: DISPOSED
Bench: HARISH KUMAR

Holding

The Court declined to entertain the writ petition and directed the petitioner to file a fresh representation before the appropriate authority, disposing the writ petition.

Summary

The petitioner, Sitaram Trivedy, a former Assistant Teacher who retired in 2001, filed a writ petition seeking payment of salary difference for the period 1 January 1971 to 31 March 1973 with statutory interest. He alleged that similarly situated teachers had been granted the salary difference, but his representation to the District Programme Officer (Establishment) remained unanswered. The Court examined the petition and found no sufficient ground to entertain the writ at this stage. It directed the petitioner to file a fresh representation before the District Programme Officer and, if others had been allowed the benefit, to consider his claim accordingly. The Court further ordered that the representation be disposed of within eight weeks of receipt of the order. Consequently, the writ petition was disposed of without any substantive order on the salary claim.

Issues considered

What is the appropriate remedy for a retired government teacher seeking payment of salary difference for a past period?
Whether a writ petition is maintainable to compel payment of salary difference when administrative representation remains pending?

Subjects

salary difference
superannuation
writ petition
administrative law
representation
public service
education department
interest

Judgment

                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                                Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1172 of 2026
                 ======================================================
                 Sitaram Trivedy Son of Late Kuldeep Trivedy, Residence of Village-Badhiya,
                 Post and Police Station-Sermera, Biharsariff, Nalanda.

                                                                             ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                   Versus
           1.    The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary Bihar, Patna.
           2.    The Chief Secretary, Education Department, Secretariat, Patna.
           3.    The Principal Secretary, Finance Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
           4.    The Director Primary Education Department, Bihar, New Secretariat at
                 Patna.
           5.    The Joint Secretary, Education Department, Bihar, Patna.
           6.    The District Magistrate, Nalanda.
           7.    The District Education Officer Biharsariff, Nalanda.
           8.    The District Program Officer (Establishment) Biharsariff, Nalanda.

                                                           ... ... Respondent/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s    :      Mr. Abhay Kumar, Adv.
                 For the Respondent/s    :      Mr. S. Raza Ahmad, AAG-5
                                                Mr. Alok Ranjan, AC to AAG-5
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   29-01-2026                     Heard the parties.

                               2. The petitioner who was appointed as an Assistant

                   Teacher in the Middle School long back on 22.05.1962 and after

                   satisfactorily discharging his duty, superannuated from the post

                   of Assistant Teacher from Ideal Middle School, Sarmera,

                   Nalanda in the year 2001, has approached this Court seeking a

                   direction upon the respondent authorities to ensure payment of

                   difference of salary from 01.01.1971 to 31.03.1973 along with

                   statutory interest.
          Patna High Court CWJC No.1172 of 2026(2) dt.29-01-2026
                                                      2/2




                                   3. It is the contention of the petitioner that identically

                    situated persons have been extended the benefit of difference of

                    salary for the afore-noted period, but despite his representation

                    filed before the District Programme Officer (Establishment),

                    Bihar Sharif, Nalanda, till date no decision has been taken.

                                   4. Having considered the submissions of the learned

                    Advocate for the petitioner, this Court does not find any reason

                    or occasion to entertain the present writ petition. However, if the

                    petitioner files a fresh representation before the respondent no.8

                    and in case others have been allowed the difference of salary for

                    the period in question, the representation of the petitioner be

                    considered and disposed off in accordance with law, preferably

                    within     a     period    of    eight    weeks   from     the   date   of

                    receipt/production of a copy of this order.

                                   5. In case the claim of the petitioner finds favour, the

                    necessary consequential order shall follow.

                                   6. The writ petition stands disposed off.



                                               (Harish Kumar, J)
rohit/-

U

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…