Patna High Court

Kamla Pati Lal KarnversusThe Bihar State Power Holding Company Ltd. and Ors

Decided: 23 February 2026
Disposal: DISMISSED
Bench: BIBEK CHAUDHURI

Holding

The writ petition is disposed, directing the respondents to settle the petitioner's honorarium claim within 90 days.

Summary

The petitioner, a contractual Data Entry Operator employed at the Block Development Officer's office in Paraiya, Gaya, alleged that he was not paid his honorarium for the period from 10 July 2019 to 30 June 2021. He had earlier filed a similar writ petition (C.W.J.C. No.1268 of 2024) which was withdrawn, and he had submitted representations to the authorities without receiving any payment. The petitioner argued that the respondents, as state instruments, were obligated to pay the honorarium for services rendered. The Court considered whether the writ petition was maintainable and whether the respondents must act on the petitioner's claim. The Court disposed of the writ petition, directing the respondents (Nos. 2, 3 & 4) to resolve the petitioner's representations and pay the due honorarium within 90 days of the order.

Issues considered

Whether a writ petition filed by a contractual employee for non-payment of honorarium is maintainable.
Whether the State authorities are obligated to pay the honorarium claimed by the contractual employee.
Whether the respondents must dispose of the petitioner's representations within a specified time.

Subjects

contractual employee
honorarium
non-payment
writ petition
civil writ jurisdiction
government contract
service claim

Judgment

                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                                Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.11797 of 2024
                 ======================================================
                 Mantu Kumar Son of Rajeshwar Mistri Resident of Village Iguni, P.O. and
                 P.S. Paraiya, Distirct-Gaya.

                                                                            ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                    Versus
           1.    The State of Bihar
           2.    The Director, Social Security Bihar, Patna.
           3.    District Magistrate, Gaya.
           4.    The Assistant Director Social Security, Gaya.
           5.    Block Development Officer, Paraiya Under the Distirct of Gaya.

                                                           ... ... Respondent/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s   :      Mr. Anil Kumar Saxena, Advocate
                 For the Respondent/s   :      Mr. Government Pleader (24)
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIBEK CHAUDHURI
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   08-08-2024                 The petitioner is a contractual Data Entry Operator. It

                   is the allegation of the petitioner that though, he has been

                   diligently working in the office of Block Development Officer,

                   Paraiya in the District of Gaya. He has not been paid any

                   honorarium from 10.07.2019 to 30.06.2021.

                               2. The petitioner previously filed a writ petition with

                   the similar prayer bearing C.W.J.C. No.1268 of 2024, the said

                   writ petition was withdrawn by the learned Advocate for the

                   petitioner with liberty to the petitioner to approach the

                   respondents for redressal of his grievances.

                               3. It is submitted by the learned Advocate for the

                   petitioner that in spite of submission of such representation, he
             Patna High Court CWJC No.11797 of 2024(2) dt.08-08-2024
                                                         2/2




                       has not been paid his honorarium during the aforesaid period.

                                   4. The petitioner is a contractual employee. The

                       instant writ petition could have been disposed of saying that the

                       writ petition is not maintainable.

                                   5. However, the petitioner has been rendering his

                       service to the Government authorities but he has not been paid

                       his daily honorarium, the respondents authority has been taking

                       his service without paying honorarium. It is the onrush duty of

                       the respondents being the instrumentality of the State to pay

                       honorarium to the petitioner against the service rendered by

                       him.

                                   6. Under such circumstances, the instant writ petition

                       is disposed of directing the respondent Nos. 2, 3 & 4 to dispose

                       of the representations filed by the petitioner, claiming his

                       honorarium from 10.07.2019 to 30.06.2021, within 90 days

                       from the date of communication/receipt of this order.

                                   7. Accordingly, the instant writ petition is thus,

                       disposed of.



                                                (Bibek Chaudhuri, J)
mdrashid/-

U

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…