Patna High Court
Kalikant JhaversusThe State Of Bihar and Ors
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
Holding
The Court held that the petition was barred by inordinate delay and that the State is not liable to pay retirement benefits to an employee of a society, leading to dismissal of the writ petition.
Summary
The petitioner, a former peon of Maithili Academy, challenged a retirement order dated 03.01.2007 that forced him to retire on 31.12.2006 without notice or a proper determination of his age, alleging violation of natural justice and seeking payment of arrears, gratuity, and other retiral dues. The respondents, representing the State and the Academy, argued that the Academy is a society under the Societies Registration Act, 1860, and that the State is not obligated to fund retirement benefits for its employees, citing the grant‑in‑aid is only for operational expenses. They also contended that the petition was filed after an inordinate delay of six years, rendering it barred by laches and the principles laid down in Supreme Court precedents on stale claims. The Court examined the nature of the Academy, the applicability of state liability, and the effect of the delay, concluding that the petitioner’s claim was untimely and the Academy’s status precludes state responsibility for retirement benefits. Consequently, the writ petition was dismissed as devoid of merit.
Issues considered
- The retirement order was issued without notice or proper determination of the petitioner's age, violating natural justice.
- Whether the State of Bihar is liable to pay retirement benefits to an employee of Maithili Academy, a society registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860.
- Whether the petition is barred by delay and laches, making it a stale claim under Article 226.
- Whether the grant‑in‑aid provided to the Academy creates any obligation on the State to fund retiral liabilities.
Legislation cited
- Constitution of India — s. Article 12, Article 226
- Societies Registration Act, 1860
Subjects
- premature retirement
- natural justice
- writ of certiorari
- mandamus
- grant-in-aid
- state liability
- delay
- laches
- autonomous society
- retirement benefits
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.20975 of 2013
======================================================
Kalikant Jha S/O Lat Jai Govind Jha Resident of Village Dhaga, Pchhawari
Tola, P.O. Kaluahi, P.S. Arer, District Madhubani.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State Of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Department of Human
Resource Development, Government of Bihar, Patna
2. The Principal Secretary, Department Of Higher Education, Government Of
Bihar, Patna.
3. The Additional Commissioner, Department Of Human Resource
Development, Government Of Bihar, Patna.
4. The Chairman, Maithili Academy, Flat No. 740/800, Lal Bahadur Shashtri
Nagar, Patna.
5. The Director-Cum-Secretary, Maithili Academy, Flat No. 740/800, Lal
Bahadur Shashtri Nagar, Patna.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : M/s K.N.Choubey, Sr. Advocate
Ambuj Nayan Chaubey
Ashok Kumar Garg, Advocates
For the State : Mr. Manoj Kumar, AC to GP 4
For the Respondent : M/s J.N.Thakur, Advocate
Nos. 4 and 5
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. G. ANUPAMA CHAKRAVARTHY
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 30-01-2026
1. The petitioner has filed the instant
application for the following relief:
“(i) For issuance of an appropriate
Writ/order/direction including a Writ in
the nature of certiorari for quashing the
premature order of retirement of the
petitioner (Annexure-1) and for
Patna High Court CWJC No.20975 of 2013 dt.30-01-2026
2/10
issuance of a Writ in the nature of
mandamus commanding the
respondents to forthwith pay the
admissible retiral dues fixed on the
basis of his emoluments payable on the
due date of retirement and arrears of
salary as per the sixth pay revision
along with suitable interest thereon to
the petitioner;
(ii) For grant of such other
relief/reliefs as the petitioner may be
found entitled to in the facts and
circumstances of the instant case.
2. The case of the petitioner in brief as
stated in the Writ petition is that he worked as a
Peon in Maithili Academy, Patna. While so
employed, he was arbitrarily ordered to retire from
service with effect from 31.12.2006, vide Letter No.
06/07 dated 03.01.2007 issued by the Chairman-
cum-Director, Maithili Academy. It is stated that the
impugned order was passed without issuance of
any notice and without any proceeding for
Patna High Court CWJC No.20975 of 2013 dt.30-01-2026
3/10
determination of the petitioner’s age, thereby
violating the principles of natural justice. According
to the petitioner, he was entitled to continue in
service till 31.01.2010, as evident from the letter
dated 08.03.2002 addressed by the Director-cum-
Secretary, Maithili Academy to the Joint Secretary –
cum – Director, Department of Higher Education,
Government of Bihar.
3. It is contended that the order of
retirement was not based on service records but on
the subjective opinion of the respondents formed
on the basis of petitioner’s appearance, which is
arbitrary and illegal. Despite repeated
representations, since January, 2007, no decision
has been taken by the respondents. It is further
stated that the petitioner was paid only half of the
salary during his service period and a substantial
amount, including arrears of salary, gratuity,
provident fund, leave encashment and other retiral
dues, remains unpaid. Though the Academy sought
release of funds from the Government for payment
of retiral dues, the petitioner’s dues were shown
Patna High Court CWJC No.20975 of 2013 dt.30-01-2026
4/10
inaccurately and incompletely. It is submitted that
similarly situated employees were paid their retiral
dues, whereas the petitioner’s claims have been
illegally withheld. Having no alternative efficacious
remedy, the petitioner has approached this
Hon’ble Court.
4. A detailed counter affidavit was filed
on behalf of respondent nos. 2 and 3. The Learned
counsel for the respondents submits that the
reliefs sought in the Writ petition are ambiguous as
the petitioner has simultaneously challenged the
order of retirement dated 03.01.2007 (Annexure-1)
and has also sought payment of retiral dues after
revision of pay as per the Sixth Pay Commission.
5. It is submitted that the petitioner
retired from service with effect from 31.12.2006 by
the impugned order dated 03.01.2007. The Writ
petition was filed after an inordinate delay of
nearly six years, without any explanation. On this
ground alone, the Writ petition is liable to be
dismissed on account of delay and laches.
6. In support of the aforesaid
Patna High Court CWJC No.20975 of 2013 dt.30-01-2026
5/10
contention, the Learned counsel for the petitioner
has relied upon the judgments of the Hon’ble
Supreme Court in (1) (2014) 4 SCC 1088,
Chennai Metropolitan Water Supply and
Sewerage Board & Ors. vs. T.T. Murali Babu;
and (2) (2006) 4 SCC 322, Karnataka Power
Corporation Ltd. vs. K. Thangappan & Anr., to
contend that a Writ court, while exercising
jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India, may refuse to entertain stale claims.
7. It is further submitted that similarly
situated employees of the Academy have already
approached this Hon’ble Court for payment of
retiral dues. In particular, reliance is placed upon
the judgment dated 25.09.2014 passed in C.W.J.C.
No. 15038 of 2009 (Ugra Nath Jha vs. The State of
Bihar & Ors.), wherein the Writ petition was
dismissed with liberty to the said petitioner to
approach the Civil Court for recovery of dues, after
taking note of the fact that Maithili Academy is
“State” within the meaning of Article 12 of the
Constitution of India.
Patna High Court CWJC No.20975 of 2013 dt.30-01-2026
6/10
8. The Learned counsel further submits
that Maithili Academy was established pursuant to
Government Resolution contained in Memo No. 876
dated 11.03.1975 as a “Society” registered under
the Societies Registration Act, 1860, to preserve
and promote Maithili language and literature, and
that it functions as per the rules mentioned in the
memorandum of association. Bare perusal of the
by-laws of the Academy would reveal that there is
no provision for pension, gratuity, leave
encashment or other retiral benefits to be payable
to its employees. The petitioner has deliberately
not brought these by-laws on record.
9. It is further submitted that since
none of the employees of the Academy are
Government employees, they are entitled for
honorarium, which cannot be revised as per the
different recommendation of the Pay Commission.
In this regard, the department has taken opinion
from the Law Department, Government of Bihar,
wherein it was opined that the State Government
is under no obligation to release grants in aid to
Patna High Court CWJC No.20975 of 2013 dt.30-01-2026
7/10
the academy for payment of gratuity and Leave
Encashment to its retired employee. The Learned
counsel further submits that although the State
Government releases annual grants-in-aid to the
Academy for meeting the expenses of the institute
it cannot be burdened with the responsibility to
pay pension, gratuity or leave encashment to the
employee of the academy.
10. It is further submitted that the Law
Department, Government of Bihar, has
categorically opined that the State Government is
under no legal obligation to release grants-in-aid
for payment of gratuity or leave encashment to
retired employees of the Academy. In this context,
the Learned counsel has drawn attention of this
Court towards paragraph Nos. 23 and 24 of the
counter affidavit which read as follows:
“23. That it is stated that the
department has taken opinion from the
Law Department, Government of Bihar
on the issue as to whether the State
Government is liable to release grants in
aid to the academy in question for
payment of gratuity and Leave
Patna High Court CWJC No.20975 of 2013 dt.30-01-2026
8/10
Encashment to its retired employee.
24. That it is stated that the
Law Department, Government of Bihar
has opined in no uncertain terms that
the State Government is under no
obligation to release grants in aid to the
academy in question particularly for
payment of gratuity and Leave
Encashment to its retired employee as
the State Government has not given any
approval for such payment.”
11. The Learned counsel for the
respondents has also placed reliance upon the
judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court dated
30.01.2019 passed in S.L.P.(C) No. 18502 of 2018
(State of Bihar & Anr. vs. Dr. Sachindra Narayan &
Ors.) relating to A.N. Sinha Institute of Social
Studies, Patna, wherein it has been held that
employees of autonomous societies cannot be
treated at par with Government employees and the
State cannot be burdened with payment of
retirement benefits. It is submitted that the said
ratio squarely applies to the present case.
12. Accordingly, Learned counsel for
Patna High Court CWJC No.20975 of 2013 dt.30-01-2026
9/10
the respondents prays for dismissal of the Writ
petition as being time barred not maintainable,
and devoid of merits.
13. Heard the Learned counsel for the
petitioner and Learned counsel for the respondents
and perused the materials available on record.
14. This Court finds that the petitioner
has approached this Court, after an inordinate and
unexplained delay from the date of the impugned
order of retirement. In the absence of any
satisfactory explanation, the petitioner is not
entitled to any discretionary relief under Article
226 of the Constitution of India.
15. This Court further finds that Maithili
Academy is a society registered under the
Societies Registration Act, 1860, which is governed
by its own memorandum of association and by-
laws. However, the grant-in-aid released by the
State Government is meant only for meeting
establishment and functional expenses of the
academy and does not create any obligation upon
the State Government to bear retiral liabilities of
Patna High Court CWJC No.20975 of 2013 dt.30-01-2026
10/10
the Academy. The employees of such institute
cannot be treated at par with the employees of the
State Government nor the State can be burdened
with the responsibility to pay pension to the
employee of the academy.
16. Apart from that as per the
submission made by the Learned counsel for the
Maithili Academy, the Academy is no more in
existence, hence the question of directing the
academy to pay the retiral benefits from the fund
of the State Government would not arise.
17. In view of the above, the Writ
petition is dismissed as devoid of merit.
18. Interlocutory Application(s), if any,
shall stands disposed of.
(G. Anupama Chakravarthy, J)
Spd/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 31.01.2026
Transmission Date
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.