Patna High Court
Devnandan PaswanversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- ANSHUMAN
Holding
Section 6 of the Bihar Agriculture Produce Market Repeal Act, 2006 does not apply to daily‑wage workers, so they are not entitled to absorption; only one month’s wages may be awarded.
Summary
The petitioners, who were daily‑wage workers in various abolished Agriculture Produce Market Committees (Bazar Samitis) after the repeal of the Bihar Agriculture Produce Market Act, 1960 by the Bihar Agriculture Market (Repeal) Act, 2006, sought quashing of an order denying them absorption and claimed arrears of salary and benefits under Section 6 of the Repeal Act and a Finance Department resolution dated 02‑02‑2018. The State argued that the Supreme Court’s decision in Nand Kumar v. State of Bihar held that Section 6 does not extend to daily‑wage employees and that no entitlement to regularisation exists. The High Court examined the language of Section 6, the Supreme Court precedent, and the status of the petitioners as daily wagers, concluding that the provision does not apply to them. Consequently, the Court dismissed the writ petitions, granting only a direction to pay each petitioner one month’s wages within three months.
Issues considered
- Whether Section 6 of the Bihar Agriculture Produce Market Repeal Act, 2006 applies to daily‑wage workers of abolished Bazar Samitis for absorption/regularisation.
- Whether the Finance Department’s resolution (Letter No. 796 dated 02‑02‑2018) creates a right to benefits for the petitioners.
- Whether the petitioners are entitled to arrears of salary beyond one month’s wages.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Agriculture Produce Market (Repeal) Act, 2006 — s. 6
Subjects
- daily wage
- absorption
- repeal act
- agriculture market
- employment regularisation
- Bihar
- Supreme Court precedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.8704 of 2023
======================================================
1. Nandu Ram Son of Shivnandan Ram Resident of Village- Chainpur, P.S.-
Orai, District- Muzaffarpur.
2. Ram Ekbal Ram, Son of Late Shivnandan Ram Resident of Village-
Chainpur, P.S.- Orai, District- Muzaffarpur.
3. Nunu Ram, Son of Late Kunkun Ram Resident of Village- Masalehpur
Bazar Samity, P.S.- Bahadurpur, District- Patna.
4. Suresh Ram, Son of Late Kunkun Ram Resident of Village- Masalehpur
Bazar Samity, P.S.- Bahadurpur, District- Patna.
5. Uday Sah, Son of Late Manikchandra Ram Resident of Village- Nurdiganj
Soda Bazar Patna city, P.S.- Malsalami, District- Patna.
6. Ram Eshwar Singh, Son of Late Manikchandra Ram Resident of Village-
Nurdiganj Soda Bazar Patna city, P.S.- Malsalami, District- Patna.
7. Prem Kumar Tiwary, Son of Late Ram Lakhan Tiwary Resident of Village-
Koiri Bigha, P.S.- Sitamarhi, District- Sitamarhi.
8. Kishori Prasad, Son of Late Ram Sogarath Prasadh Resident of Village-
Girmishani, P.S.- Sitamarhi, District- Sitamarhi.
9. Prem Shankar Prasad, Son of Late Babulal Prasad Resident of Village and
P.S.- Harnathpur, District- East Champaran.
10. Upendra Prasad Yadav, Son of Late Jitu Yadav Resident of Village-
Sundarpur, P.S.- Katrisarai, District- Nalanda.
11. Ashok Kumar Sharma, Son of Late Yadunandan Sharma Resident of
Village- Vishunpur, P.S.- Bajirganj, District- Gaya.
12. Ram Pravesh Singh, Son of Late Chamri Singh Resident of Village-
Vishunpur, P.S.- Bajirganj, District- Gaya.
13. Raj Narayan Singh, Son of Late Nandlal Thakur Resident of Village-
Jagdishpur, P.S.- Rajapakar (Haripur), District- Vaishali.
14. Ashok Kumar Sahi, Son of Sita Saran Sahi Resident of Village- Prataptand,
P.S.- Bhagwanpur, District- Vaishali.
15. Mumfar Ali Idreshi, Son of Late Md. Rafique Gdreshi Resident of Village-
Dindyal Nagar Bagha Kashi Compound, P.S.- Bagha, District- Batiya.
16. Om Prakash, Son of Late Anandi Prasad Resident of Village- Jehanabad, P.S.
and District- Jehanabad.
17. Matiur Rahman, Son of Late Md. Idrish Resident of Village and P.S.-
Majhauliya, District- Champaran (Bettiah).
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar.
2. The Additional Chief Secretary, Personnal and Administrative Reforms
Department, Old Secretariat, Bihar, Patna.
Patna High Court CWJC No.8704 of 2023 dt.24-04-2026
2/13
3. The Agriculture Production Commissioner, Department of Agriculture, New
Secretariat, Bihar, Patna.
4. The Joint Secretary, Department of Agriculture, New Secretariat, Bihar,
Patna.
5. The Administrator Bihar State Agriculture Marketing Board (Abolished),
Pant Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna.
6. The Sub- Divisional Officer, Patna City Cum Special Officer, Agriculture
Produce Market Committee (Abolished) Masalahpur Bazar Samiti, District-
Patna.
7. The Sub- Divisional Officer Patna City Cum Special Officer, Agriculture
Produce Market Committee (Abolished) Patna City Bazar Samiti, District-
Patna.
8. The Sub- Divisional Officer Patna City Cum Special Officer, Agriculture
Produce Market Committee (Abolished) Sitamarhi Bazar Samiti, District-
Sitamarhi.
9. The Sub- Divisional Officer Patna City Cum Special Officer, Agriculture
Produce Market Committee (Abolished) Darbhanga Bazar Samiti, District-
Darbhanga.
10. The Sub-Divisional Officer Patna City Cum Special Officer, Agriculture
Produce Market Committee (Abolished) Siwan Bazar Samiti, District-
Siwan.
11. The Sub Divisional Officer, Patna City Cum Special Officer, Agriculture
Produce Market Committee (Abolished) Chhapra Bazar Samiti, District-
Chhapra.
12. The Sub-Divisional Officer, Patna City Cum Special Officer, Agriculture
Produce Market Committee (Abolished) Sahebganj Bazar Samiti, District-
Muzaffarpur.
13. The Sub-Divisional Officer, Patna City Cum Special Officer, Agriculture
Produce Market Committee (Abolished) Biharsharif Bazar Samiti, District-
Nalanda.
14. The Sub-Divisional Officer, Patna city Cum Special Officer, Agriculture
Produce Market Committee (Abolished) Bagaha Bazar Samiti, District-
West Champaran.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
with
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 4074 of 2023
======================================================
1. Devnandan Paswan Son of Maran Paswan, Resident of Village-Bankipur,
Gorakh (Fatuha), P.S.-Fatuha, District-Patna.
2. Laxaman Ram son of Late Shivnandan Ram, Resident of Village-Chainpur,
P.S.-Orai, District-Muzaffarpur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
Patna High Court CWJC No.8704 of 2023 dt.24-04-2026
3/13
1. The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary Government of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Additional Chief Secretary personal and Administrative Reforms
Department Old Secretariat, Bihar, Patna.
3. The Agriculture Production Commissioner Department of Agriculture, New
Secretariat, Bihar, Patna.
4. The Joint Secretary Department of Agriculture, New Secretariat, Bihar,
Patna.
5. The Administrator, Bihar State Agriculture Marketing Board (ABOISHED)
Pant Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna.
6. The Sub Divisional Officer cum Special Officer Agriculture Produce Market
Committee (ABOLISHED), Fatuha Bazar Samittee, District-Patna.
7. The Sub-Divisional Officer Patna City cum Special Officer, Agriculture
Produce Market Committee (ABOLISHED), Masalahpur Bazar Samittee,
District-Patna.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
(In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 8704 of 2023)
For the Petitioner/s : Ms. Kumari Sujata Sinha, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Anant Prasad Singh, SC- 15
Mrs. Deepika Sharma, AC to SC-15
(In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 4074 of 2023)
For the Petitioner/s : Ms. Kumari Sujata Sinha, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Anant Prasad Singh, SC- 15
Mrs. Deepika Sharma, AC to SC-15
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 24-04-2026
Learned counsel for the petitioners and learned
counsel for the State in both these cases are present.
2. In both the writ petitions, petitioners prayed to
quash the order No. 53/107 dated 07.09.2020/31.01.2023, issued
by the respondent no. 5. by which the petitioners’ claim towards
arrears of salary and further directing the respondent to grant the
benefits to the petitioners considering their cases in the light of
the resolution of the Finance Department, Government of Bihar
as contained in Letter No. 796 dated 02.02.2018 has been made.
Patna High Court CWJC No.8704 of 2023 dt.24-04-2026
4/13
3. Learned counsel for petitioners submits that
petitioners were engaged on daily wages on different dates in
their respective Bazar Samiti on different posts, whose
particulars they have annexed in the respective petitions.
Learned counsel for petitioners further submits that in the year
2006, the Bihar Agriculture Produce Market Act, 1960 has been
repealed by virtue of Bihar Agriculture Market (Repeal) Act,
2006. After enactment of Repealing Act, the services of the
petitioners were terminated by the Bazar Samiti on different
dates under the different directions of the Administration of the
Agriculture Market Board issued vide letter no. 295 dated
12.02.2007.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits
that the petitioners were given remuneration towards their
employment per month for their work on the principle of equal
pay for equal work. Learned counsel for the petitioners further
submits that Section 6 of the said Repealing Act grants
protection and talks about absorption of officials and employees
of the Bihar Agriculture Marketing Board/Market
Committee/Bazar Samiti. But absorption of the petitioners were
not made. Series of persons have moved before this Hon’ble
Court on different dates. The petitioners had filed
Patna High Court CWJC No.8704 of 2023 dt.24-04-2026
5/13
representations before respondent no. 5 for consideration of
their grievances in the light of the resolution of the Finance
Department as contained in letter no. 796 dated 02.02.2018, but
order has not been passed on their representation. Thereafter, the
petitioners moved before this Hon’ble Court in CWJC No. 6938
of 2020, which was disposed of vide order dated 22.12.2021, in
which this Hon’ble Court directed to pass speaking order on the
representation filed by the petitioners within a period of four
months from the date of receipt of copy of the said order.
Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that the
respondent authorities have passed the order, which is impugned
in the present writ petition, and rejected the claim of absorption
instead thereof, they talk about payment of one month salary
only, but even the said one month salary has not been paid.
Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that in the
light of Section 6 of the Repealing Act as well as in the light of
letter no. 796 dated 02.02.2018 issued by the Finance
Department, Government of Bihar, they are entitled for the
relief of absorption. Therefore, by virtue of these writ petitions
the petitioners prayed that the order impugned be set aside and
direction be issued to the State Government for their absorption
and adjustment in different departments in the light of Section 6
Patna High Court CWJC No.8704 of 2023 dt.24-04-2026
6/13
of the Repealing Act.
5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State,
on the other hand, submits that petitioners are not entitled for
any relief due to the reason that the issue involved in the present
case, i.e. applicability of Section 6 to the petitioners being the
daily wager and the applicability of the resolution of the Finance
Department, Government of Bihar vide letter no. 796 dated
02.02.2018 has already been tested by the Hon’ble Supreme
Court of India in Civil Appeal No. 2835 of 2014 arising out of
SLP (Civil Appeal No. 7555 of 2010) in case of Nand Kumar
Vs. State of Bihar and Ors. and, therefore, learned counsel for
the State submits that the petitioners have no case at all and
there is no need of interference in the order impugned. She
further submits that the writ petition be dismissed.
6. In this regard, the learned counsel for the State has
also shown resolution No.1108 dated 15.03.2007 (Annexure-A
of the counter affidavit filed in the first writ petition) whose
clause 3.5 reproduced as under:
“3-5 ftu dfeZ;ksa ds fy, leqfpr fjfDr;k¡ miyC/k
ugha gksxk ;k tks dehZ lek;kstu laca/kh vkns”k dk vuqikyu ugha
djsaxs] mUgsa rqjar lsok eqDr dj fn;k tk;sxkA bu dfeZ;ksa dks
dsoy oSls lsoksijkUr ykHk vuqekU; gksaxs ftuds fy, cktkj
ik’kZn@ lfefr ds inkf/kdkjh@ deZpkjh ds :i esa lsok lekIr
Patna High Court CWJC No.8704 of 2023 dt.24-04-2026
7/13
djus dh frfFk dks gdnkj gksaxsA”
7. After hearing the parties and upon perusal of the
documents as well as the relevant law, it transpires to this Court
that the issue involved in the present case is that whether
petitioners being daily wager working in the respective Bazar
Samiti are entitled to get the benefits in the light of Section 6 of
the Bihar Agriculture Produce Market Repeal Act, 2006 read
with the resolution of the Finance Department, Government of
Bihar as contained in letter No. 796 dated 02.02.2018.
8. From the pleading of both the writ petitions, it
becomes crystal clear that admittedly the petitioners were
appointed on daily wages. It is also not in dispute that some of
the petitioners had worked for a long period and the services of
the said daily wagers varied from period to period. From perusal
of the relevant provisions and with a view to decide the present
case, it is necessary to reproduce Section 6 of the Bihar
Agriculture Produce Market Repeal Act, 2006, which is as
follows:
“6. Absorption of officers and
employees of Bihar Agriculture Marketing
Board/Market Committee/Bazar Samiti (1) On and
from the date of repeal of the Act, all officers and
employees of the Board, shall remain in
employment, as if the Act has not been repealed and
they shall continue to be paid same salary and
Patna High Court CWJC No.8704 of 2023 dt.24-04-2026
8/13
allowances as was payable on the date of repeal of
the Act till such time State Government has taken
such final decision as is provided hereafter.
(1) The State Government shall
constitute a committee of Secretaries consisting of
three Secretaries who shall prepare detailed scheme
of absorption, retirement, compulsory retirement or
voluntary retirement. other service conditions of
officers and employees of the Board and the
Committee Scheme prepared by group of Secretaries
shall be placed before the State Government within
two months from the date of enforcement of the
present Act. The State Government shall thereafter
approve the scheme:
Provided that it shall be open to the
State Government to modify, amend or suggest
modification or amendment and the scheme
thereafter shall be made operational in such form
and intent as finally approved by the State
Government. Scheme approved by the State
Government shall be considered as statutory scheme
framed under this Act.
(iii) After the scheme approved by the
State Government is enforced it shall be fully
implemented in its form and intent within three
months from the date of its enforcement.
(iv) Group of Secretaries constituted
under sub-section (ii) above shall be competent to
decide utility and de-ployment of offices and
employees of the Board or the Committee during
transition period and it shall not be open to any
officer of employee to question decision of group of
Secretaries
(v) Scheme framed under this Act shall
have effect, notwithstanding any other Act,
Patna High Court CWJC No.8704 of 2023 dt.24-04-2026
9/13
Ordinance, Rule, regulation, direction, order or
instruction and condition of service of officers and
employees of the Board or the Committee, shall be
governed and regulated under the scheme to the
extent provision has been made in the scheme.
Provided further that it shall be
competent for the State Government to amend,
modify, alter or substitute the scheme so framed for
removal of difficulties in implementation of the
scheme”
9. From perusal of Section 6 of the said Repeal Act,
which talks about the absorption of officials and employees of
the Bihar Agriculture Marketing Board/ Market Committee/
Bazar Samiti, the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in case of
Nand Kumar Vs. State of Bihar (supra) has decided in
paragraph Nos. 20, 21, 22, 23 and 24 which state as follows:
“20. We have heard learned
counsel for the parties. We have also perused
the records placed before us. We find that the
status of the appellants was continuing to be
as daily wagers. They cannot be treated as
permanent Government employees. They all
worked as employees of the Board. We have
also found that no steps were followed by the
Board to safeguard the service of these
appellants. We have not been able to find out
whether any advertisement was issued by the
Government to regularise them. In these
circumstances, in view of the submission
which has been advanced on behalf of the
appellants, we do not find that there is any
Patna High Court CWJC No.8704 of 2023 dt.24-04-2026
10/13
substance in the matter/arguments put
forwarded before us on behalf of the
appellants as we have been able to find out
that the appellants have served as daily
wagers and we do find that Section 6(i)
makes it clear that after the repeal of the
Agriculture Produce Act, 1960, all officers
and employees of the Board are to continue
in employment and they shall continue to be
paid what they were getting earlier as salary
and allowance till such time the State
Government takes an official decision as per
the further provisions of Section 6. Such
provision certainly allows continuance of the
officers and employees of the Board to
continue in employment in the same status.
The status of the daily wage employees and
regular employees of the Board is eminent
from the said provision. It cannot be said
that the status of the daily wage employees
can enjoy or acquire the same status as that
of the regular employees. In these
circumstances, we do not find that there was
any discrimination between the daily wage
employees and the regular employees as is
tried to be contended before us. Therefore,
such submission has no substance, in our
opinion, for the reason that the difference
continues and is recognised under the said
provision of the Repeal Act. So far as the
power of the Committee of Secretaries
constituted in terms of section 6(ii) of the
Repeal Act is concerned, it is to prepare a
scheme of absorption as well as of
retirement, compulsory retirement or
Patna High Court CWJC No.8704 of 2023 dt.24-04-2026
11/13
voluntary retirement and other service
conditions of officers and employees of the
Board. In our opinion, the scheme which was
prepared by the Committee of Secretaries is
only in the nature of recommendation and
the State has the power either to accept,
modify or amend the same before granting
its official approval. Therefore, after the
sanction is granted by the Government in
respect of the said scheme, it would gain the
status of statutory scheme framed under the
said Act and would be enforced within the
time to be indicated in section 6(iii) of the
Repeal Act, 2006.Nand Kumar vs State of
Bihar - 2014 Supreme(SC) 151
21. Therefore, in the light of the
said provision, we do not find that the
Committee of Secretaries can be faulted in
treating the daily wage employees on a
different footing and deciding for removal of
their services.
22. We have consciously noted
the aforesaid decisions of this Court. The
principle as has been laid down in Umadevi
(supra) has also been applied in relation to
the persons who were working on daily
wages. According to us, the daily wagers are
not appointees in the strict sense of the term
‘appointment’. They do not hold a post. The
scheme of alternative appointment framed
for regular employees of abolished
organisation cannot, therefore, confer a
similar entitlement on the daily wagers of
abolished organisation to such alternative
Patna High Court CWJC No.8704 of 2023 dt.24-04-2026
12/13
employment. [See Avas Vikas Sansthan v.
Avas Vikas Sansthan Engineers Association
(2006 (4) SCC 132)]. Their relevance in the
context of appointment arose by reason of
the concept of regularisation as a source of
appointment. After Umadevi (supra), their
position continued to be that of daily wagers.
Appointment on daily wage basis is not an
appointment to a post according to the rules.
Usually, the projects in which the daily
wagers were engaged, having come to an
end, their appointment is necessarily
terminated for want of work. Therefore, the
status and rights of daily wagers of a
Government concern are not equivalent to
that of a Government servant and his claim
to permanency has to be adjudged
differently.
23. In these circumstances, in
our considered opinion, the
regularisation/absorption is not a matter of
course. It would depend upon the facts of the
case following the rules and regulations and
cannot be de hors the rules for such
regularisation/absorption.
24. Accordingly, we do not find
any substance with regard to the arguments
advanced before us on behalf of the
appellants. We do not find any merit in the
appeals. Accordingly, we uphold the decision
of the High Court and affirm the same,
dismissing these appeals.”
10. Upon perusal of Section 6 and the analysis made
by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in Nand Kumar (supra),
Patna High Court CWJC No.8704 of 2023 dt.24-04-2026
13/13
it transpires that even those daily wagers who were receiving
wages on a monthly basis have been duly considered by the
Hon’ble Supreme Court.
11. After a detailed discussion, it becomes crystal
clear that Section 6 is not applicable to daily wagers. Therefore,
in light of the discussion and analysis made by the Hon’ble
Supreme Court, as well as the provisions of the Repeal Act, this
Court is of the firm view that the petitioners are not entitled to
any relief, except to the extent that each petitioner shall be
entitled to one month’s wages.
12. Accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed,
with a direction to the respondent authorities to make payment
of one month’s wages to all the petitioners (daily wagers),
equivalent to the amount they were receiving during their
tenure, within a period of three months from the date of
receipt/production of a copy of this order before the concerned
authority.
(Dr. Anshuman, J)
khushbu/-
AFR/NAFR N.A.F.R.
CAV DATE N/A
Uploading Date 01.05.2026
Transmission Date
Checking your session…