Patna High Court
Satinath GangopadhyayversusThe State Of Bihar and Ors
- Decided
- Disposal
- WITHDRAWN
- Bench
- PARTHA SARTHY
Holding
The application is disposed of as withdrawn.
Summary
The petitioner, Satinath Gangopadhyay, filed a writ petition seeking certiorari to quash two orders dated 20‑12‑2016 issued by a Project Director, who was not his controlling authority, that reduced his pay scale and directed recovery of alleged excess salary. He also sought mandamus for refund of the deductions and a stay of the orders. During the pendency of the application, the petitioner died, and his counsel requested permission to withdraw the petition. The court, without examining the merits of the pay‑revision dispute, accepted the request and disposed of the application as withdrawn. Consequently, no relief was granted and the orders remained unaffected.
Issues considered
- Whether the writ petition can be withdrawn after the death of the petitioner
- Whether the court may entertain the petition without a live petitioner
Subjects
- pay revision
- writ of certiorari
- withdrawal of application
- civil writ jurisdiction
- salary deduction
- controlling authority
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1837 of 2017
======================================================
Satinath Gangopadhyay S/o Late Subodh Gangopadhyay, Resident of Flat No.
201, Janpriya Apartment, North Sri Krishnapuri, P.S.- Sri Krishnapuri,
District- Patna.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Department of Science
and Technology, Government of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Executive Committee of Bihar Council on Science and Technology
through its Chairman, Patna, Bihar
3. The Development Commissioner, Bihar cum Chairman (Executive
Committee of Bihar Council on Science and Technology), Bihar, Patna
4. The Principal Secretary, Department of Science and Technology,
Government of Bihar cum Vice Chairman (Executive Committee of Bihar
Council on Science and Technology), Bihar, Patna
5. The Director, Science and Technology, Government of Bihar cum Member
Secretary, Bihar Council on Science and Technology, Patna, Bihar
6. The Project Director/Incharge, Bihar Remote Sensing Application Center,
Department of Science and Technology Department, Government of Bihar,
Patna
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Siddhartha Prasad, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY
ORAL ORDER
4 05-01-2026 The petitioner has filed the instant application for the
following relief(s):
“a. To issue writ in the nature of certiorari
to quash the order dated 20/12/2016 contained in
memo no. 635 whereby Project Director who is not a
controlling authority of the petitioner has modified the
benefits of earlier pay revision which was granted to
the petitioner by the controlling authority in pursuance
of the decision taken by the Executive Committee of
Bihar Council on Science and Technology in
Patna High Court CWJC No.1837 of 2017(4) dt.05-01-2026
2/3
accordance with the Fifth and sixth pay revision. By the
said order dated 20/12/2016 petitioner's pay scale has
been reduced from the pay scale of 5000-8000 to 4500-
7000 and pay scale of 9300-34800 to 5200-20200
respectively.
b. To issue writ in the nature of certiorari to
quash the order dated 20/12/2016 contained in memo
no. 634 whereby Project Director who is not a
controlling authority of the petitioner gave a direction
to recover the excess payment made to the petitioner
and the amount quantified to Rs 6,37,305/-. The said
"excess payment" has been termed by the Project
Director because he reached to the conclusion that
earlier pay fixation of petitioner was not done properly
(although the earlier pay fixation of petitioner was
done by the competent authority but the modification of
pay scale of petitioner was done by the Project
Director who is not a controlling authority).
c. To issue writ in the nature of mandamus
directing the respondents to refund the deductions
made from the salary of the petitioner in pursuance of
the impugned order.
d. It is further prayed that during the
pendency of the instant application orders dated
20/12/2016 contained in memo no. 634 and 635 issued
by the respondent no.6 be stayed.
e. To pass such other order(s) direction(s)
for which petitioner is entitled in the facts and
circumstances of the instant case.”
2. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner
that as per oral instructions received, the petitioner has died
Patna High Court CWJC No.1837 of 2017(4) dt.05-01-2026
3/3
during pendency of the instant application. Inspite of all efforts,
no further instruction has been received in the matter. In view of
the same, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to
withdraw the instant application.
3. As prayed, without going into the merits of the
case, the application stands disposed of as withdrawn.
(Partha Sarthy, J)
Saurabh/-
U
Checking your session…