Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Mohd. Shahid Alam @ Md. Shahid AlamversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
DISPOSED

Holding

The petition is disposed without adjudicating the merits, granting the petitioner liberty to approach the concerned authority.

Summary

The petitioner, Md. Shahid Alam, challenged the validity of Rule‑6 issued under Resolution No. 970 dated 31‑08‑2013, which required teachers appointed after 15‑02‑2011 to have their contributions calculated on a fixed‑salary basis, alleging it was ultra‑violet and retrospectively applied. He sought a declaration that the rule was void and a writ of mandamus against the State of Bihar and related education officials. The Court noted that similar writ petitions (CWJC 985/2015, CWJC 4517/2021, CWJC 696/2025) had been disposed of earlier, granting reliefs, but observed that the petitioner had not filed any representation with the concerned authority. Consequently, the Court dismissed the petition without addressing the merits, granting the petitioner liberty to approach the authority with the earlier orders. No substantive opinion on the ultra‑vires claim was expressed.

Issues considered

  • Whether Rule‑6 issued under Resolution No. 970 is ultra‑violet and can be declared void.
  • Whether the retrospective effect of the Resolution from 15‑02‑2011 is invalid.
  • Whether a writ of mandamus can be issued to compel the respondents to act.

Subjects

  • ultra vires
  • retrospective legislation
  • mandamus
  • teacher salary
  • civil writ jurisdiction
  • administrative law

Judgment

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                     Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2248 of 2024
     ======================================================
     Mohd. Shahid Alam @ Md. Shahid Alam, Son of Shamsuzzoha Resident of
     Village Ratni P.O. Perbheli P.S.Kadwa District- Katihar

                                                               ... ... Petitioner/s
                                       Versus
1.   The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar. Patna.
2.   The Principal Secretary, Education Department, Government of Bihar,
     Patna.
3.   The Special Director, Secondary Education, Education Department,
     Government of Bihar, Patna.
4.   The Joint Secretary, Education Department Government of Bihar, Patna.
5.   The District Education Officer, Katihar, District Katihar.
6.   The District Program Officer, (Establishment) Katihar, District Katihar.
7.   The District Program Officer (Secondary Education) Katiha District Katihar.
8.   The Bihar State Madarsa Education Board, Patna, through Secretary Apex
     Tower, Haroon Nagar Colony Sector-2, P.S.- Phulwari Sharif, Patna.
9.   The Secretary, Madarsa Education Board, Patna, Apex Tower, Haroon Nagar
     Colony Sector-2, P.S.- Phulwari Sharif, Patna.
10. The Secretary, Madarsa Darul Hadees Ratni, Perbheli, Durgaganj, District-
    Katihar.
11. The Head Maulvi Madarsa Darul Hadees Ratni, Perbheli, Durgaganj,
    District- Katihar.

                                               ... ... Respondent/s
     ======================================================
     Appearance :
     For the Petitioner/s   :       Mr. Md. Musowir, Advocate
     For the State          :       Mr. Standing Counsel 8
     For the Board          :       Md. Shahzad Hassan Khan, Advocate
                                    Md. Aslam Ansari, Advocate
     ======================================================
     CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
             and
             HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR
     ORAL JUDGMENT
     (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE)

      Date : 17-03-2026

                       This Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case has been filed by

      the petitioner Mohd. Shahid Alam @ Md. Shahid Alam seeking

      for following reliefs:-
Patna High Court CWJC No.2248 of 2024 dt.17-03-2026
                                           2/4




                                                 “That, by this writ petition,
                                 the petitioner would like to challenge the
                                 validity of Rule-6 issued under the
                                 signature of the Respondents no. 4 and
                                 contained in his Resolution no. 970 dated
                                 31.8.2013 and declare its ultra- virus,
                                 whereby and whereunder the instruction
                                 has been issued that the contribution will
                                 be paid on the basis of calculation of fixed
                                 salary to those teachers in place of
                                 regular pay-scale, who are appointed
                                 against the vacancy on or after 15.2.2011
                                 by the State Government.
                                                 Alternatively to declare that
                                 the Resolution no. 970 dated 31.08.2013
                                 could not take its retrospective effect i.e.
                                 with effect from 15.2.2011 for debarring
                                 the appointee against the vacancy on or
                                 after 15.2.2011 though the impugned
                                 Resolution       itself   is   effective   from
                                 01.04.2013 according to the Respondents
                                 themselves.
                                                 The petitioner would further
                                 like to pray before this Hon’ble Court that
                                 a writ of MANDAMUS be issued against
                                 the Respondents.”
                         2. During course of argument, learned counsel for

         the petitioner submits that similarly situated persons approached

         this Court in CWJC No. 985 of 2015 so also in CWJC No. 4517
Patna High Court CWJC No.2248 of 2024 dt.17-03-2026
                                           3/4




         of 2021 and their cases were disposed of vide order dated

         27.03.2019 and 25.04.2023 respectively, they have got the

         necessary reliefs and in view of such order passed in the

         identical matters, the petitioner is entitled to get the relief. He

         further submits that one Md. Abdul Quadir filed CWJC No. 696

         of 2025 seeking for similar relief and this Court disposed of the

         said writ petition vide order dated 13.01.2026 giving him liberty

         to approach the concerned authority for ventilating his

         grievance.

                         3. When we posed a pertinent question to the

         learned counsel for the petitioner as to whether any

         representation has been made by the petitioner before the

         concerned authority for ventilating his grievance basing on the

         orders passed by this Court in the aforesaid writ petitions, the

         answer was in negative.

                         4. Learned counsel for the petitioner, however,

         submits that the liberty may be granted to the petitioner to

         approach the concerned authority by filing representation and

         also annexing the copies of the orders passed in the aforesaid

         two writ petitions.

                         5. In view of such submission, the writ petition is

         disposed of giving liberty to the petitioner to approach the
             Patna High Court CWJC No.2248 of 2024 dt.17-03-2026
                                                        4/4




                      concerned authority for ventilating his grievance.

                                      6. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed

                      any opinion on the merits of the claim of the petitioner.



                                           (Sangam Kumar Sahoo, CJ)



                                                  (Harish Kumar, J)
uday/-
AFR/NAFR                NAFR
CAV DATE                NA
Uploading Date          18.03.2026
Transmission Date       NA


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.