Patna High Court
Renu KumariversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- HARISH KUMAR
Holding
The authorities are mandated to pay the petitioner her salary for the period she discharged duties, as the appellate authority’s order and this Court’s direction are binding.
Summary
Renu Kumari, appointed as a Block Teacher, was denied acceptance of her joining despite an order from the District Appellate Authority directing the Head Master to admit her. She filed an execution application under Rule 16 of the Bihar State Teaching Institutions Teachers and Employees (Dispute Redressal and Appeal) Rules, 2020, seeking compliance and punishment of the defiant officials. Although the Head Master eventually accepted her joining following the High Court's earlier direction, the authorities continued to withhold her salary and prevented her from marking attendance in the e‑Shiksha Kosh system. The petitioner contended that such refusal was arbitrary and violated the appellate and court orders. The Court held that the respondents must pay the petitioner her salary for the period she performed duties unless a contrary order is issued. Accordingly, the writ petition was disposed of with a directive to the District Education Officer to ensure payment within four weeks.
Issues considered
- Whether the education authorities can lawfully deny salary to a teacher whose appointment and joining have been ordered by the appellate authority and the High Court.
- Whether the provisions of Rule 16 of the Bihar State Teaching Institutions Teachers and Employees (Dispute Redressal and Appeal) Rules, 2020, compel the authorities to comply with the order and pay the pending salary.
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to have her attendance recorded in the e‑Shiksha Kosh system.
Subjects
- appointment
- salary
- Rule 16
- Bihar State Teaching Institutions Teachers and Employees (Dispute Redressal and Appeal) Rules, 2020
- writ jurisdiction
- education department
- non‑payment of salary
- administrative law
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1189 of 2026
======================================================
Renu Kumari Wife of Prakash Prasad, Resident of Village- Basmanpur, P.S.-
Pataura Tola Lala District- East Champaran, Bihar.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Addl. Chief Secretary, Department of
Education, Bihar, Patna.
2. The Addl. Chief Secretary, Department of Education, Government of Bihar,
Patna.
3. The Director, Primary Education, Bihar, Patna.
4. The District Education Officer, East Champaran, Motihari.
5. The District Programme Officer, (Estab.), East Champaran, Motihari.
6. The Block Development Officer now Block Panchayat Raj Officer-cum-
Executive Officer, Panchayat Sammati -cum- Secretary Block Teacher
Employment Committee, Motihari Sadar, District- East Champaran.
7. The Block Education Officer, Motihari, (Rural), East Champaran.
8. The Head Master, Government Upgraded Middle School, Basamanpur, P.O.-
Laxmipur, Block- Motihari, District- East Champaran.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar, Adv.
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Standing Counsel (18)
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
2 29-01-2026 Heard the parties.
2. A very sorry state of affairs has been depicted
before this Court. The petitioner was duly appointed as a Block
Teacher. However, when her joining was not accepted, she was
constrained to approach before the District Appellate Authority,
East Champaran, Motihari, by preferring Appeal No. 1042 of
2017. The Authority vide its order dated 23.12.2020 directed the
Head Master of the school to accept the joining of the petitioner.
3. Notwithstanding the aforesaid order, the joining of
Patna High Court CWJC No.1189 of 2026(2) dt.29-01-2026
2/3
the petitioner was not accepted and she was again compelled to
file an application bearing Case No.45/2023-24 for execution of
the order and punishment of the concerned authority for its
willful defiance of the order under Rule-16 of the Bihar State
Teaching Institutions Teachers and Employees (Dispute
Redressal and Appeal) Rules, 2020 (for short ‘the Rules, 2020).
4. This Court has further been apprised that the
learned Appellate Authority while exercising its power under
Rule-16 of the Rules, 2020 awarded a cost of Rs.50,000/- upon
the Head Master of the school; even though the joining of the
petitioner was not accepted and then she approached this Court
by filing C.W.J.C. No.1189 of 2025. In pursuance of the
direction of this Court on 27.01.2025, finally the joining of the
petitioner was accepted vide Memo No.369 dated 28.01.2025.
Despite his joining having been accepted by the Head Master of
the school, now she has not been allowed the salary for the
period she has been discharging her duty to the entire
satisfaction of the authority concerned.
5. Narrating the entire facts, it is stated that once the
petitioner has been allowed to discharge the duty as Prakhand
Teacher in pursuance of the order of the District Appellate
Authority as well as the order of this Court passed in C.W.J.C.
Patna High Court CWJC No.1189 of 2026(2) dt.29-01-2026
3/3
No.1189 of 2025, can the respondent authorities deny the salary.
The arbitrariness on the part of the authorities is writ large that
the petitioner has also not been allowing to mark her attendance
in e-Shiksha Kosh as her particulars have not been uploaded till
date by the Head Master/Block Education Officer.
6. Learned Advocate for the State prays for a short
adjournment to get instruction(s) and file counter affidavit.
7. Considering the limited grievance of the petitioner
and taking note of the recalcitrant attitude of the concerned
respondents, including the Head Master of the school, instead of
keeping the matter pending, this Court directs the District
Education Officer, East Champaran, Motihari to look into the
matter and ensure that the petitioner must get payment of her
salary for the period she has been discharging her duty unless
there is any order passed otherwise, preferably within a period
of four weeks from today, keeping in mind the order passed by
the Hon’ble Apex Court in Man Singh v. State of U.P. [2022
Live Law (SC) 341].
8. The writ petition stands disposed off.
(Harish Kumar, J)
rohit/-
U
Checking your session…