Patna High Court
Kishor Kumar JhaversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- ANSHUMAN
Holding
The court did not adjudicate the merits but directed the petitioner to seek departmental redress under Clause 4.C of the Bihar State Litigation Policy 2011, effectively staying the petition.
Summary
Kishor Kumar Jha, a male family welfare worker, challenged a memo that cancelled his ACP benefit on the ground that his service break from 1998 to 2012 had been regularised after a termination letter was quashed by the High Court and the One‑Man Committee. He sought a writ of certiorari to set aside the memo and a writ of mandamus directing payment of salary for the said period, relying on the Division Bench judgment in L.P.A. No. 1078 of 2015 (Karoo Sao v. State of Bihar). The State argued that the earlier judgment was limited to its original petitioner. The Patna High Court noted the Bihar State Litigation Policy 2011, particularly Clause 4.C, which mandates departmental settlement of similar service matters, and ordered the petitioner to file a representation before the Director‑in‑Chief (Administration) of Health Services. The Director‑in‑Chief was directed to determine whether the petitioner’s case falls within Clause 4.C and, if so, to grant relief within three months. The writ petition was consequently disposed without a substantive ruling on the merits.
Issues considered
- Whether the Division Bench judgment in L.P.A. No. 1078 of 2015 is applicable to the petitioner’s claim for reinstatement and salary.
- Whether the memo cancelling the petitioner’s ACP benefit can be quashed by a writ of certiorari.
- Whether a writ of mandamus directing payment of salary for the period of alleged service break is appropriate.
Subjects
- service law
- reinstatement
- ACP benefit
- certiorari
- mandamus
- Bihar State Litigation Policy 2011
- administrative settlement
- similar cases
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.17654 of 2024
======================================================
Kishor Kumar Jha S/o Lutan Jha Resident of Ward No.-4, P.S.- Andhratharhi,
District- Madhubani, Presently posted as Male Family Welfare Worker,
Primary Health Center, Andhratharhi, Madhubani.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through Additional Chief Secretary, Health Department,
Govt. of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Additional Chief Secretary, Health Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.
3. The Director-in-Chief (Administration), Health Services, Govt. Of Bihar,
Patna.
4. The Regional Deputy Director, Health Services, Darbhanga Division,
Darbhanga.
5. The Civil Surgeon, Madhubani, District- Madhubani.
6. The Incharge Medical Officer, Primary Health Center, Andhratharhi,
Madhubani.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shashi Bhushan Singh, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Vivek Pd. (GP-7)
Ms. Manisha Singh (AC to GP-7)
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN
ORAL ORDER
3 12-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
counsel for the State.
2. The present writ petition has been with the
following relief/s:-
“I. For issuance of an appropriate writ in the
nature of certiorari for quashing the part of
Memo No. 2595 dated 03.10.2024 with respect
to the petitioner by which benefit of ACP
granted to the petitioner has been cancelled
and further a direction has been given to
recover the paid amount on account of grant of
Patna High Court CWJC No.17654 of 2024(3) dt.12-02-2026
2/4
ACP w.e.f. 09.08.1999, giving the reason that
there was break in service from 10.02.1998 to
08.05.2012, the fact is that the termination
letter has been quashed, by the Hon'ble High
Court and subsequently by One Man
Committee, then as per Bihar Service Code
and law laid down by the Hon'ble High Court
the reinstatement in service will take place
from date of termination with consequential
benefit.
II. For issuance of an appropriate writ in the
nature of mandamus commanding and
directing the respondents to pay the salary in
view of law laid down by the Hon'ble Division
Bench in L.P.A. No. 1078 of 2015, judgment
dated 11.09.2018 for the period of 10.02.1998
to 08.05.2012 by which similar matter has
been decided as out of 34 employees contained
in memo No. 709(4) dated 04.05.2012 issued
by the Director in Chief, Health Services, most
of them have been paid.
III. For issuance of any other appropriate
writ/writs, order/orders, direction/ directions
for which the writ petitioner shall be found
entitled under the fact and circumstances of
the case.”
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that his
case is squarely covered in the light of judgment passed by the
Patna High Court CWJC No.17654 of 2024(3) dt.12-02-2026
3/4
Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court, dated 11.09.2018 in
L.P.A. No. 1078 of 2015 arising out of C.W.J.C. No. 16148 of
2013 (Karoo Sao Vs. The State of Bihar & Ors.). Therefore,
counsel submits that in the light of the said judgment, the relief
should also be granted to the present petitioner.
4. Learned counsel for the State, on the other hand,
submits that, as per the operative part of the judgment passed in
L.P.A. No. 1078 of 2015 i.e. para 21, it is crystal clear that the
said judgment is applicable only to the petitioner of said L.P.A,
and not to the present petitioner.
5. It transpires to this Court that in the year 2011, the
state of Bihar has formulated a law namely, Bihar State
Litigation Policy, 2011, whose Clause 4.C is very much relevant
which states as follows:-
“A good number of cases are from the category
of similar cases. Each Government
Department will aim to consider and settle the
claim of the representationist/ applicant-
employee/ citizen, if the claim is found covered
by any decision of the Court. Many service
matters of this nature, can be disposed of at
the level of the Department itself without
compelling the litigant to come to the Court. In
this manner, the Government Departments
would be acting as efficient litigants.”
Patna High Court CWJC No.17654 of 2024(3) dt.12-02-2026
4/4
6. The aforesaid Clause 4.C of the Bihar State
Litigation Policy, 2011 has been framed with obvious reason i.e.
to stop the unnecessary litigation in similarly situated matters.
7. In this view of the matter, this Court without
entering into the merit or demerit of the case, directs the
petitioner to file his representation before the Director-in-Chief
(Administration), Health Services, Govt. Of Bihar, Patna
(Respondent no.3) within 30 days from today. The Respondent
no.3 upon receiving the petitioner’s representation, shall pass a
reasoned and speaking order on his representation by checking
the petitioner’s case that whether his case is covered under
Clause 4.C of the Bihar State Litigation Policy, 2011 or not. In
case, it has been found that the matter of the petitioner is
covered under the Clause 4.C of the Bihar State Litigation
Policy, 2011, then the Respondent no.3 is directed to grant relief
to the petitioner also as like that of petitioner of L.P.A. No. 1078
of 2015 mentioned above, within three months.
8. Accordingly, this writ petition stands disposed off.
(Dr. Anshuman, J)
Divyansh/-
U
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.