Patna High Court
Anil ChaudharyversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- AJIT KUMAR
Holding
Petitioners are entitled to salary for the period of service as they are permitted to work and no order has removed them from their posts.
Summary
A group of nine Prakhand Teachers employed by the Bihar Department of Education since 3 August 2015 filed a writ petition alleging non‑payment of their salaries. Their appointments were under challenge by unsuccessful candidates, and a District Teachers Employment Appellate Authority order denied salary on the ground of a pending complaint. The petitioners argued that, despite the pending grievance, they continued to perform duties and were therefore entitled to remuneration under Article 23 of the Constitution. The High Court held that while the appointment validity is to be decided by the appropriate appellate authority, the petitioners’ right to salary accrues as long as they are allowed to work and no removal order exists. Consequently, the Court directed the petitioners to file a fresh representation before the District Programme Officer for payment of the due salaries, to be decided within four weeks, and disposed of the writ application.
Issues considered
- Whether teachers whose appointments are under dispute are entitled to salary for the period they have been performing duties.
- Whether the order denying salary on the basis of a pending complaint is legally valid.
- Whether Article 23 of the Constitution mandates payment of salary to public servants performing duties.
Subjects
- salary
- non‑payment
- appointment validity
- public servants
- Article 23
- district appellate authority
- representation
- payment of dues
- writ petition
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.6204 of 2026
======================================================
1. Anil Chaudhary Son of Badri Chaudhary at present working as Prakhand
Teacher of U.M.V. Kajhiya Prakhand Akbarpur, District- Nawada.
2. Israt Bano, Daughter of Md. Islam at present working as Prakhand Teacher
at Rajkiya M.V. Fatehpur, Prakhand Akbarpur, District-Nawada.
3. Sunita Kumari, Daughter of Sita Ram at present working as Prakhand
Teacher at U.M.V. Kajhiya Prakhand Akbarpur, District- Nawada.
4. Amrita Devi Daughter of Sri Suresh Chauhan at present working as Prak-
hand Teacher at U.M.V. Paharpur Prakhand- Akbarpur, District- Nawada.
5. Sarita Kumari, Daughter of Shiv Balak Paswan at present working as Prak-
hand Teacher as M.V. Sherpur Pakari Prakhand-Akbarpur, District- Nawada.
6. Arvind Kumar, Son of Shri Janki Ram at present working as Prakhand
Teacher as M.V. Kulna Prakhand- Akbarpur, District-Nawada.
7. Ratan Kumar, Son of Arjun Chaudhary, at present working as Prakhand
Teacher as M.V. Paharpur Prakhand- Akbarpur, District Nawada.
8. Sanjay Kumar, Son of Ram Autar Prasad at present working as Prakhand
Teacher at M.V. Kulna Prakhand- Akbarpur, District-Nawada.
9. Shanjeev Kumar Son of Kedar Singh at present working as Prakhand
Teacher at M.V. Kulna Prakhand- Akbarpur, District- Nawada.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Additional Chief Secretary, Department of
Education, Government of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Director, Primary Education, Government of Bihar, Patna.
3. The District Education Officer, Nawadah.
4. The District Programme Officer (Est), Nawadah.
5. The Block Education Officer, Akbarpur, District-Nawadah.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Shivam
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Government Pleader (13)
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
2 28-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners
and learned counsel for the State.
2. The petitioners have filed the instant writ
Patna High Court CWJC No.6204 of 2026(2) dt.28-04-2026
2/5
application for the following reliefs:-
(i) For setting aside the impugned order bearing
Memo No.120 dated 21.06.2025, passed in
Complaint Case No.03 of 2024 by learned District
Teachers Employment Appellate Authority,
Nawada, (Annexure-P/8), whereby in pursuant to
liberty granted by this Court in C.W.J.C. No.7458
of 2024 vide order dated 13.08.2024 in batch cases
giving liberty to the petitioners to move before
District Appellate Authority first for redressal of
grievance for non-payment of salary of the working
period since 03.08.2015 to till date and
accordingly, petitioner filed Case No.03 of 2024
before the District Appellate Authority, Nawada
which has been disposed of without passing final
order on the issue of payment of due salary since
03.08.2015 during which petitioners have
discharged duty but by virtue of impugned order
claim of petitioners have been denied in pretext of
pendency of one complaint being Case No.03 of
2025 filed by the unsuccessful candidates raising
the issue of validity of appointment of petitioners
but till date appointment of petitioners have not
been cancelled and as such impugned order is bad
in eye of law as also contrary to Article 23 of the
Constitution of India.
(ii) For directing the respondents concerned to pay
the due salary of petitioners for working period i.e.
03.08.2015 till date in view of settled proposition
of law by Hon’ble Apex Court in judgment reported
in 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 341 (Man Singh Versus State
of Uttar Pradesh) as well as 2024(1) PLJR (SC)
176 (Radheshyam Yadav Versus State of Uttar
Pradesh) as also in view of Memo No.734 dated
08.07.2022 issued by the Respondent State itself
specially with regard to payment of salary of
working period and despite that non payment of the
same in pretext of pendency of case filed by
Patna High Court CWJC No.6204 of 2026(2) dt.28-04-2026
3/5
another person is not tenable in the eye of law.
(iii) For any other relief(s) for which petitioners
are found entitled to in the eye of law.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the
petitioners are working on the post of Prakhand Teacher and on
certain complaints having been filed by certain aggrieved
persons, the salary of the petitioners, for reasons unexplained,
have not been paid from the date of initial appointment i.e.
03.08.2015 to till today. It is very astonishing that while the
petitioners are being allowed to work, their salaries are not
being paid, even if their appointment might be under cloud.
4. At this stage, learned counsel for the State submits
that, upon perusal of the order dated 02.09.2025 passed in
C.W.J.C. No. 14166 of 2025, it appears that the case of the
petitioners is similar, and the appeal preferred by the
unsuccessful candidates has not yet been decided by the
Appellate Authority.
5. To such submissions of the State-counsel, the counsel
for the petitioner has submitted that the unsuccessful candidates,
being aggrieved with the order passed in C.W.J.C. No.14166 of
2025 had filed a review petition before this Court, which was
dismissed and thereafter LPA No. 61 of 2026 was preferred,
which also stood dismissed. The said fact is not controverted by
learned counsel for the State. It is the case of the petitioner that
Patna High Court CWJC No.6204 of 2026(2) dt.28-04-2026
4/5
the case of the petitioners are covered by the order dated
02.09.2025 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 14166 of 2025.
6. In view of the above, this Court is of the opinion that
when the petitioners are being allowed to discharge their duties,
they are entitled to salary for the posts against which such duties
are being performed. Learned counsel for the petitioners has
also drawn the attention of this Court to certain decisions of this
Court as well as of the Hon’ble Apex Court, wherein it has been
held that complaints questioning appointments are required to
be adjudicated by the District Appellate Authority. It appears
that such complaints have already been filed against the
petitioners and similarly situated persons.
7. Be that as it may, since these petitioners are allowed
to work and discharge the duties against the posts in question,
and there is no order or decision of the competent authority
removing them from the said posts, they are entitled to salary of
the post which is being discharged by these petitioners.
8. Accordingly, the petitioners are directed to file a fresh
representation before the District Programme Officer
(Establishment) Nawada, giving all details of the period for
which their salaries are to be paid by the authorities, along with
supporting documents. On such representation being filed, the
Patna High Court CWJC No.6204 of 2026(2) dt.28-04-2026
5/5
District Programme Officer (Establishment) Nawada shall be
obliged to take a final decision thereon. If it is found that the
petitioners have been discharging duties from the date of their
initial appointment i.e. 03.08.2015, the salary as applicable to
the said post shall be paid to the petitioners without any delay.
9. The entire exercise must be completed within a
period of four weeks from the date of filing of such
representation by the petitioners.
10. With the aforesaid observation and direction,
the instant writ application stands disposed of.
(Ajit Kumar, J)
shikha/-
U
Checking your session…