Patna High Court
Binod Kumar ChaudharyversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- ALOK KUMAR SINHA
Holding
The writ application was disposed with liberty granted to the petitioner to file a fresh representation and a directive that the authorities dispose of it within a stipulated time, without deciding the substantive reliefs claimed.
Summary
The petitioner, an assistant teacher, sought direction that teachers who cleared the In‑Service Teachers Training Examination on a second attempt be granted the Matric Trained Scale of Pay from 01‑10‑2003 without loss of seniority, and that the authorities' refusal violated Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution. He also alleged mala‑fide, arbitrary and ultra‑vires action by the education department. The court, with the parties' consent, did not adjudicate the substantive claims but allowed the petitioner to file a fresh representation before the District Education Officer and the District Programme Officer within one month, and directed the authorities to dispose of that representation within three months, issuing a reasoned order. If the fresh representation is decided in his favour, the relief should be granted within an additional three months. All pending interlocutory applications were deemed disposed.
Issues considered
- Whether teachers who passed the In‑Service Teachers Training Examination on the second attempt are entitled to the Matric Trained Scale of Pay w.e.f. 01‑10‑2003 without prejudice to seniority.
- Whether the refusal to grant such pay and seniority protection violates Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution.
- Whether the actions of the education authorities are mala‑fide, arbitrary, beyond jurisdiction and an abuse of power.
- Whether the authorities' actions are otherwise illegal.
Subjects
- seniority
- pay scale
- In‑Service Teachers Training Examination
- Article 14
- Article 16
- Article 21
- administrative law
- fresh representation
- education department
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.5056 of 2026
======================================================
Binod Kumar Chaudhary son of Late Ramchandra Chaudhary, Resident of
Village -Ward No. 06, Nayaka Tola, Post Office Sugauli, Police Station
Sugauli, District East Champaran at Motihari. At present posted and working
as an Assistant Teacher in Govt. Middle School Chainpur, Anchal Sugauli,
District - East Champaran at Motihari.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Additional Chief Secretary -cum-the Principal Secretary, Education
Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.
3. The Additional Chief Secretary -cum-the Principal Secretary, Finance
Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.
4. The Director, Primary Education, Bihar, Patna.
5. The Regional Deputy Director of Education, Tirhut Division, Muzaffarpur.
6. The District Education Officer, East Champaran, at Motihari.
7. The District Programme Officer (Establishment), East Champaran, at
Motihari.
8. The District Accounts Officer, East Champaran, at Motihari.
9. The District Treasury Officer, East Champaran, at Motihari.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Umesh Kumar Mishra, Adv.
For the State : Mr.Ramadhar Singh, G.P-25
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR SINHA
ORAL ORDER
2 20-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
counsel appearing for the respondent-State.
2. With the consent of both the parties, this writ
application is being disposed of at this stage itself.
3. In the present writ application, the petitioner has
prayed for the grant of following reliefs:
“I. Whether the Petitioners', who have
passed their "In-Service Teachers Training
Examination" in the 2nd Attempt, deserves to be
Patna High Court CWJC No.5056 of 2026(2) dt.20-04-2026
2/3
granted Matric Trained Scale of Pay 'Notionally'
w.e.f. 01.10.2003, i.e., in such a manner that their
Seniority is not adversely affected.
II. Whether the actions of the authorities
concerned in not protecting the seniority of the
petitioner and other similarly situated persons, are
violative of Article 14, 16, and 21 of the constitution
of India, thus fit to be deprecated in strong words, by
this Hon'ble Court?
III. Whether, the action of the respondent
authorities is not malafide, arbitrary, without
jurisdiction and abuse of power vested in them?
IV. Whether, the action of the respondent
authorities is otherwise bad in the eye of law?”
4. After advancing some argument, learned counsel for
the petitioner submits that for seeking the aforesaid reliefs, the
petitioner is prepared to file a fresh representation before the
District Education Officer, East Champaran at Motihari and
District Programme Officer, (Estbalishment), East Champaran at
Motihari and prays that an appropriate direction be issued to the
District Education Officer, East Champaran at Motihari and
District Programme Officer, (Estbalishment), East Champaran at
Motihari to dispose of the fresh representation within a fixed time
frame, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.
5. To the aforesaid submission being made by learned
counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel appearing for the
respondent-State does not have any objection.
6. Considering the limited nature of prayer being made
by learned counsel for the petitioner, this writ application is
Patna High Court CWJC No.5056 of 2026(2) dt.20-04-2026
3/3
disposed of granting liberty to the petitioner to file a fresh
representation before the District Education Officer, East
Champaran at Motihari and District Programme Officer,
(Estbalishment), East Champaran at Motihari within one month
from today and if such a representation is filed by the petitioner,
the same shall be disposed of within a period of three months from
the date of receipt of the representation, after giving an
opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.
7. Needless to emphasize that the final order which shall
be passed by the authorities should be a reasoned and speaking
order. It is also made clear that in case, the petitioner is found
entitled to the relief which the petitioner would be claiming
through the fresh representation, the same should be extended to
the petitioner within a further period of three months from the date
of passing of the final order.
8. With the aforesaid observation/direction and liberty
granted, this writ application is disposed of. All pending
interlocutory application(s), if any, shall also be deemed to have
been disposed of.
(Alok Kumar Sinha, J)
kundan/-
U
Checking your session…