Patna High Court
Murlidhar MishraversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- ANSHUMAN
Holding
The Court held that until the decision on the validity of the petitioner’s appointment is final, it cannot order payment of salary arrears.
Summary
Murlidhar Mishra, appointed as Nyaya Mitra on 30‑11‑2007, claimed that he had not received any salary for the period he served and filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the State of Bihar and various officials to pay his arrears with interest. He had earlier approached the Sub‑Divisional Officer, the District Magistrate and the High Court, obtaining a limited relief in 2025 that remanded the matter for a hearing before a competent authority. The competent authority heard the case but ruled against Mishra, and he subsequently appealed to the Collector. The High Court examined whether it could order payment of salary while the legality of Mishra’s appointment remained unsettled. The Court held that until the appointment is finally adjudicated, it is inappropriate to direct any authority to pay the arrears. Consequently, the writ petition was dismissed, with liberty granted to the petitioner to seek payment after the appointment issue is finally resolved.
Issues considered
- Can the High Court issue a mandamus directing payment of salary arrears when the validity of the petitioner’s appointment is still under dispute?
- Is the petitioner entitled to salary for the period he served pending a final decision on his appointment?
- Should the Court defer any monetary relief until the appointment issue is finally decided?
Subjects
- salary arrears
- appointment validity
- mandamus
- Nyaya Mitra
- Panchayat Raj
- writ jurisdiction
- public servant
- pending appointment
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.8226 of 2025
======================================================
Murlidhar Mishra Son of Late Dhruva Narayan Mishra, Resident of Village-
Choupra Bazar, P.S.- Janki Nagar, District- Purnia
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar Through Principal Secretary, Panchayat Raj Department,
Govt. of Bihar, Patna
2. The Principal Secretary, Panchayat Raj Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna
3. The Director, Panchayat Raj Department, Government of Bihar, Patna
4. The District Magistrate, Purnea
5. The Sub Divisional Officer, Banmankhi, District- Purnea.
6. The Block Development Officer, Banmankhi, District- Purnea.
7. The Nodal Officer-cum-B.W.O., Banmankhi, District- Purnea.
8. The Sarpanch, Gram Kachahari, Ramnagar, Farsahi, Milik, Block-
Banmankhi, District- Purnea
9. The Secretary, Gram Kachahari, Ramnagar, Farsahi, Milik, Block-
Banmankhi, District- Purnea
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sharda Nand Mishra, Advocate
Mr. Dhandev Kumar, Advocate
Ms. Isha Mishra, Advocate
Ms. Meera Kumari, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Government Advocate (03)
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 21-04-2026
Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned
Counsel for the State.
2. The present writ petition has been filed with the
following reliefs:-
“i. For issuance of writ in
the nature of mandamus for direction
Patna High Court CWJC No.8226 of 2025 dt.21-04-2026
2/6
to the respondents for grant due
arrear of salary to the petitioner since
date of his appointment i.e. on
30.11.2007 on the post of Nyaya Mitra
in Gram Kachahari, Ramnagar
Farsahi, Milik, Block-Banmankhi,
District-Purnea.
ii. For further issue
direction to the respondents pay due
arear of salary (contract amount) of
the working period to the petitioner
from his date of the appointment on
the post of Nyaya Mitra i.e. on
30.11.2007 to till today along with the
compound interest 9% per annum to
till date of full and final payment to
the petitioner.
iii. For issue direction to
respondents for considering the
application filed by the petitioner for
payment due salary on the post of
Nyaya Mitra from the date of his
appointment to till today but said
application is still pending for due
consideration.
iv) For further give other
legal consequential benefit to the
petitioner to the post.”
3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the
Patna High Court CWJC No.8226 of 2025 dt.21-04-2026
3/6
petitioner was appointed on the post of Nyay Mitra on
30.11.2007 and since then he was started discharging his duty as
Nyay Mitra in the Gram Kachhari, Ramnagar, Farsahi, Milk,
Block- Banmankhi, District- Purnea. Counsel submits that after
lapse of four months, an application was filed in the form of
complaint before the S.D.O., Banmankhi and the S.D.O. has
passed an order without jurisdiction after lapse of statutory
period on 21.05.2008 and directed the concerned authority to
take proper action against the petitioner. Counsel further
submits that the petitioner has preferred appeal before the
District Magistrate, but his appeal was again dismissed on
22.09.2017 in Misc. Appeal Case No.77 of 2008, against which
the petitioner has preferred CWJC No.6524 of 2019, which was
dismissed vide order dated 17.08.2022. Thereafter, the
petitioner preferred L.P.A. No.490 of 2022, which was allowed
in favour of the petitioner on 18.03.2025 and the order of the
S.D.O., Collector have been set aside. He submits that the order
passed by L.P.A. Bench is Annexure-P/5, by which the matter
was remitted back and direction was made that complainant is
required to be heard in the matter in view of the allegation and
counter allegation on behalf of the appellant and the
complainant, competent authority was directed to hear to all
Patna High Court CWJC No.8226 of 2025 dt.21-04-2026
4/6
stakeholders in this matter.
4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the
said hearing before the competent authority is decided against
the petitioner and the petitioner has preferred appeal before the
Collector. Counsel for the petitioner submits that but the
present writ petition has been filed for directing the respondent
authorities to make payment of salary of the petitioner during
the period he has worked as he is undisputedly worked as Nyay
Mitra.
5. No one appears on behalf of the State.
6. But from the record, it transpires to this Court that
the appointment of petitioner was under challenge. It is true that
the LPA Court has remanded the matter with the following
observations as made in LPA No.490 of 2022, whose paragraphs
4, 5 and 6 reads as follows:
“4. The LPA stands allowed,
reserving liberty to the concerned official
respondents to proceed in accordance with
law. If there is any serious complaint in that
event appellant shall be provided an
opportunity of oral hearing. The appellant
is also permitted to file his detailed
explanation to the show cause to be issued
by the concerned official respondents. The
above exercise shall be completed within a
Patna High Court CWJC No.8226 of 2025 dt.21-04-2026
5/6
period of four months from the date of
receipt of this order.
5. Pending I.A., if any, stands
disposed off.
6. At this stage, learned Counsel
for the respondents submit that the
complainant is required to be heard in the
matter in view of the allegation and counter
allegation on behalf of the appellant and
complainant, competent authority is directed
to hear who are all stakeholders in the
matter. ”
7. It further transpires to this Court that in compliance
of the order passed by Hon’ble Division Bench, the matter was
heard by the competent authority, which has been decided
against the petitioner. According to the argument made by the
Counsel that the petitioner has challenged the order passed by
the competent authority before the Collector. This Court upon
perusal of the order, which was decided against the petitioner
though it has already been set aside in which the appointment of
the petitioner is itself under challenge.
8. This Court is of the firm view that until and unless
the decision relating to his appointment shall not take place, it
shall not be appropriate for this Court to direct any authority for
payment. Hence, this writ petition is dismissed granting liberty
Patna High Court CWJC No.8226 of 2025 dt.21-04-2026
6/6
to the petitioner that after acquiring the finality of the decision
with regard to his appointment, he may sue further before the
appropriate authority for the period he worked, if it has been
found that his appointment is valid and legal.
(Dr. Anshuman, J)
Mkr./-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 23.04.2026
Transmission Date
Checking your session…