Patna High Court
Shivaji MishraversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- ANSHUMAN
Holding
Outsourced employees have no direct right of action against the State for wage payment, and the writ petition is dismissed.
Summary
The petitioners, Shivaji Mishra and Ravi Kumar, are outsourced employees of a private agency engaged by the Bihar Watershed Development Society (BWDS) to perform work for the State of Bihar. They filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the State to pay them monthly consolidated salaries with a 10% annual increment, as approved by the BWDS governing board on 23-09-2020. The State argued that the petitioners have no direct contractual relationship with it, as their employer is the private agency, and therefore they lack a right of action against the State. The petitioners also failed to implead their immediate employer as a party to the writ. The Court held that, in the absence of the immediate employer as a party, it could not entertain the petition on its merits. Consequently, the writ petition was disposed, with liberty granted to the petitioners to pursue their grievance through their employer or file a writ through the employer.
Issues considered
- Whether outsourced employees can directly invoke a writ of mandamus against the State for payment of wages when their immediate employer is a private agency.
- Whether the failure to implead the immediate employer bars the Court from entertaining the petition on merits.
Subjects
- writ jurisdiction
- mandamus
- outsourced employees
- contractual work
- right of action
- wage payment
- Bihar Watershed Development Society
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2066 of 2024
======================================================
1. Shivaji Mishra Son of Rajeshwar Mishra, Resident of C- 74, Census No.-
83. Ashiyana Nagar, A G Colony, P.S.- Shashtri Nagar, District- Patna, Bihar.
2. Ravi Kumar Son of Jay Nath Pandey, Resident of Matihani Mandir,
Matihani, Bara, P.S.- Bodh Gaya, District- Gaya, Bihar.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar Through the chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Old
Secretariat, Patna.
2. The Development Commissioner cum Chairman Bihar Watershed
Development Society, Bihar at Patna.
3. The Principal Secretary, Department of Agriculture, Bihar at Patna.
4. The Agriculture Production Commissioner cum Vice Chairman Bihar
Watershed Development Society, Bihar at Patna.
5. The Project Director cum Chief Executive Officer, Bihar Watershed
Development Society, Bihar at Patna.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Chandra Kant, Adv.
Mr. Praveen Kumar, Adv
Mr. Navin Kumar, Adv.
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Rajat Kumar Tiwary, AC to SC-24
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN
ORAL ORDER
3 05-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned
counsel for the State.
Re:- I.A. No.01 of 2024
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that the
present interlocutory application has been filed under wrong
advice, and therefore, he is not pressing the same.
3. Learned counsel for the State has no objection for
the same.
4. As such, the present I.A. No.01 of 2024 is hereby
dismissed as not pressed.
Patna High Court CWJC No.2066 of 2024(3) dt.05-02-2026
2/3
Re:- C.W.J.C. No.2066 of 2024
The present writ petition has been filed with the
following relief/s:-
“That this Writ Application is being filed for
issuance of order(s) or direction(s) or writ(s) in the nature
of mandamus directing the respondents to pay the Monthly
Consolidated Pay with 10% yearly increment from
01.04.2019 to the petitioners who are the employees of the
Bihar Watershed Development Society (S.L.N.A.) Bihar
which was approved in the Meeting Proceeding dated
23.09.2020 of Governing Board of the Bihar Watershed
Development Society, Bihar and/or for issuance of any
further order(s) or direction(s) or writ(s) which this Hon'ble
Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and
circumstances of the instant case.”
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that it is
well known that the petitioners are the outsource employees
working for a private organization through whom, petitioners
entered in the Government agency to work. He further submits
that for the payment of a remuneration to the petitioners, the
State Government has taken a policy decision, and the said
policy decision has not been implemented. It is due to this
reason, the petitioners have grievance and filed the present writ
petition.
3. Learned counsel for the State, on the other hand,
submits that the agency through which the petitioners started
Patna High Court CWJC No.2066 of 2024(3) dt.05-02-2026
3/3
working, have not been added as party in the writ petition and
the petitioners have directly moved before this court and filed
the present writ petition. Counsel further submits that there is no
direct relationship between the petitioners and the State. The
petitioners are employees of an agency to which the State has
granted contractual work for a limited period, therefore, the
petitioners have no right of action against the State.
4. In this background, this Court is of the view that
the petitioners have not impleaded their immediate employer as
a party to the writ petition, as such, this Court restrains itself
from passing any order on merits.
5. In light of the submissions made, the present writ
petition is hereby disposed off, granting liberty to the petitioners
to raise whatever grievance they may have only through their
employers and not directly against the State, with further liberty
to file a writ petition through their immediate employers.
(Dr. Anshuman, J)
Prakashmani/-
U
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.