Patna High Court
Ranjeet KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- ANSHUMAN
Holding
Appointees to the post of Lower Division Clerk after 20‑December‑2000 are not entitled to the higher pay scale and the writ petition is dismissed.
Summary
Five lower‑division clerks employed in the District Welfare Office, Gaya, filed a writ petition seeking entitlement to the higher pay scale of Rs.4000‑Rs.6000, arguing that the principle of equal pay for equal work should apply. The State contended that the Full Bench decision in Ravi Shankar Kumar v. State of Bihar held that appointees to the post of Lower Division Clerk after the 20‑December‑2000 demerger are confined to the Rs.3050‑Rs.4590 scale. The Court reiterated the Full Bench ruling, noting that the Finance Department’s Resolution of 20‑December‑2000 re‑classified vacancies of the pre‑demerger Assistant post as Lower Division Clerk, limiting their pay scale. The Court also observed that a pending S.L.P. (C) No. 38217 of 2025 could affect similarly situated persons. Consequently, the writ petition was dismissed, but the petitioners were granted liberty to revive the petition by filing an application if the S.L.P. is decided in their favour.
Issues considered
- Whether appointees to the post of Lower Division Clerk after the 20‑December‑2000 demerger are entitled to the higher pay scale of Rs.4000‑Rs.6000.
- Whether the principle of ‘equal pay for equal work’ applies to the post of Lower Division Clerk in this context.
- Whether the outcome of S.L.P. (C) No. 38217 of 2025 can affect the petitioners’ entitlement.
Subjects
- Lower Division Clerk
- Pay Scale
- Demerger
- Equal Pay for Equal Work
- Writ Petition
- Finance Department Resolution 20-12-2000
- Patna High Court
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.8560 of 2024
======================================================
1. Ranjeet Kumar Son of Nand Kishore Mahto, Resident of Village-
Bahadurpur, P.O.- Jakhim, P.S.- Rafiganj, District- Aurangabad. Presently
posted as Lower Division Clerk in District Welfare Office, Gaya.
2. Shashikant Kumar, Son of Yogendra Paswan, Resident of Village- Khuthan,
P.O.- Dihara, P.S.- Obra, District- Aurangabad. Presently posted as Lower
Division Clerk in District Welfare Office, Gaya.
3. Mithilesh Kumar, Son of Sipahi Yadav, Resident of Village- Taregna, P.O.-
Bindaul, P.S.- Bihta, District- Patna. Presently posted as Lower Division
Clerk in District Welfare Office, Gaya.
4. Prabhakar Kumar, Son of Bankey Bihari Roy, Resident of Village and P.O.
and P.S.- Sono, District- Jamui. Presently posted as Lower Division Clerk in
District Welfare Office, Gaya.
5. Manai Kumar Gupta, Son of Lal Bahadur Sah, Resident of Village- Saidra,
Khurd, P.O.- Darauli, P.S.- Bhabhua, District- Kaimur(Bhabhua). Presently
posted as Lower Division Clerk in District Welfare Office, Gaya.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through The Secretary, SC/ST Welfare Department, Govt.
of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Secretary, SC/ST Welfare Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.
3. The Director, SC/ST Welfare Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.
4. The District Welfare Officer, Gaya.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Gyan Shankar, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Government Pleader 17
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN
ORAL ORDER
2 20-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and
learned counsel for the State.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the
issue involved in the present case has been decided by the
Hon’ble Full Bench of this Court in the case of Ravi Shankar
Kumar vs. The State of Bihar, through the Chief Secretary &
Patna High Court CWJC No.8560 of 2024(2) dt.20-02-2026
2/4
Ors., along with other analogous cases, reported in 2025 SCC
Online Pat 2627, whose paragraph Nos. 82 and 83 state as
follows:-
82. In ultimate analysis, we
proceed to answer the question referred to
the larger Bench in C.W.J.C. No. 23831 of
2018 as under:-
(i) Any person appointed on the
post of Lower Division Clerk after demerger
in the scale of Rs.3050-Rs.4590/- cannot
claim and would not be entitled to a higher
pay scale of Rs.4000-Rs.6000/-. This Court
has already noticed that the judgment of the
Division Bench in the case of Smt. Mosarrat
Arra Khanam (Supra) was not brought to the
notice of the subsequent Division Bench in
the case of Avinash Kumar Chakerworty)
(supra). It is further held that the principle
of “Equal pay for equal work” has no
application in these matters.
83. In C.W.J.C. No. 2804 of 2020,
three questions have been referred to the
larger Bench, we answer the same in
corresponding terms as under:-
(i) the views expressed by the
Hon’ble Division in the case of Smt.
Mosarrat Arra Khanam and others (supra)
is the correct view. We do not approve the
views expressed by the Division Bench in the
Patna High Court CWJC No.8560 of 2024(2) dt.20-02-2026
3/4
case of Avinash Kumar Chakerworty and
others. The case of Binit Kumar and Others
(supra) deals with altogether a different
issue which is not falling for consideration
in the present writ applications.
(ii) After Finance Department’s
Resolution dated 20.12.2000, a demerger of
the post of Assistant resulted in existence of
three different posts i.e. (I) Lower Division
Clerk (ii) Upper Division Clerk and (iii)
Assistant. In terms of clause (5)(i) of the
Resolution Dated 20.12.2000 the vacancies
existing in the post of Assistant (prior to
demerger) would be taken as the vacancies
existing in the post of Lower Division Clerk
which is the junior most/ lowest post
available in that category. Thus, the
petitioners who have been appointed after
20.12.2000 could have been appointed only
against the post of Lower Division Clerk in
the pay scale of Rs.3050/- Rs.4590/-.
(iii) All the appointees on the post
of Lower Division Clerk after 20.12.2000,
irrespective of their source of appointment
are entitled to the pay scale of Rs.3050 – Rs.
4590/-.
3. In this view of the matter, for the purpose of relief,
a cut-off date has been fixed for those who were appointed after
20.12.2000 and those who were appointed up to 20.12.2000.
Patna High Court CWJC No.8560 of 2024(2) dt.20-02-2026
4/4
4. Counsel for the petitioner further submits that a
S.L.P. (C) No. 38217 of 2025 preferred by other similarly
situated person.
5. However, learned counsel for the State submits that
the issue involved in the present case has already been decided
by the Hon’ble Full Bench of this Court in case of Ravi Shankar
Kumar (Supra), according to which, the petitioners have no
entitlement at present. But, in case, the S.L.P. (C) No. 38217 of
2025 preferred by other similarly situated person is decided in
their favour, then the petitioners shall also be entitled for the
same.
6. In this background, the present writ petition is
hereby disposed off granting liberty to the petitioners that in
case, the above named S.L.P. (C) No. 38217 of 2025 decided in
favour of other similarly situated person, then the petitioners by
way of filing an application shall revive this writ petition.
(Dr. Anshuman, J.)
Aman Kumar/-
U
Checking your session…