Patna High Court
Arbind KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- ANSHUMAN
Holding
The petitioners must file a fresh representation before the Principal Secretary, PHED, who will decide the claim, and the writ petition is disposed.
Summary
Four petitioners, employees of the Public Health Engineering Department, filed a writ petition seeking the grant of a higher pay scale (Rs. 6,500‑10,500 for 1st ACP and Rs. 10,000‑15,200 for 2nd ACP) based on a 2016 judgment (C.W.J.C. No. 18433) and the Bihar State Litigation Policy, 2011. They had submitted representations to the Executive Engineer, but the court held that the Principal Secretary, PHED, is the competent authority for such matters. The petitioners had not filed their representation before the Principal Secretary, rendering their claim procedurally incomplete. The court directed the petitioners to file a fresh representation before the Principal Secretary, who must decide the matter within 90 days. Consequently, the writ petition was disposed of without a substantive order on the pay‑scale claim.
Issues considered
- The petitioners are entitled to the higher pay scale without filing a fresh representation before the competent authority.
- Whether the Executive Engineer is the appropriate authority to consider the petitioners' representation for pay‑scale revision.
Subjects
- pay scale
- civil service remuneration
- writ petition
- administrative law
- representation before competent authority
- Bihar State Litigation Policy
- procedural requirement
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.9360 of 2024
======================================================
1. Arbind Kumar S/o- Ram Naresh Prasad, R/o Village Prahlad Chak, P.O. and
P.S.- Parsa, District-Patna.
2. Pappu Kumar, S/o- Bhagirath Prasad, R/o village- Sultanpur, Dahabigha,
P.O. and P.S.- Hilsa, District- Nalanda.
3. Sanjay Kumar Suman S/o- Late Jitu Lal, R/o Mohalla- New Bishunpur
Pakari, near Gas Godam, Yadav Path, P.O. and P.S.- Anisabad, District-
Patna.
4. Shailendra Kumar Jha, S/o- Rajendra Jha, R/o Mohalla - Priyadarshni Nagar,
Dhobia Kothi, P.O. and P.S.- Tilkamanjhi, Bahadurpur, District- Bhagalpur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through its Finance Secretary, Finance Department, Govt.
of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Principal Secretary, P.H.E.D., Bihar, Patna, Visheshwaraiya Bhawan,
Bailey Road, Patna.
3. The Engineer-in-Chief-cum-Special Secretary, P.H.E.D. Bihar, Patna,
Visheshwaraiya Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna.
4. The Superintending Engineer, P.H. Engineering Circle, Patna.
5. The Superintending Engineer P.H.E. Circle, Bhagalpur.
6. The Executive Engineer, P.H. Division, Hilsa.
7. The Executive Engineer, P.H. Division, Biharsarif.
8. The Executive Engineer, P.H. Division, Patna west, Patna.
9. The Executive Engineer, P.H. Division, Bhagalpur East, Bhagalpur.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Amit Anand, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Sitaram Yadav (GP-16)
Mr. Yatindra Narayan (AC to GP-16)
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN
ORAL ORDER
2 17-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned
counsel for the State.
2. The present writ petition has been filed with the
following relief/s:-
Patna High Court CWJC No.9360 of 2024(2) dt.17-02-2026
2/4
“I. For issuance of an appropriate writ or
writs, direction or directions commanding the
respondents to consider and grant of similar
pay scale of Rs. 6500-10500 (P.B.-2+4800) in
1st ACP and Rs. 10000-15200 (Pay Band-3 +
6600) in 2nd ACP in the light of the judicial
order passed in CWJC No. 18433 of 2016 and
analogous cases, which has been affirmed by
the Hon’ble Apex Court on 25.04.2023 as well
as the clause 4.C(1) of the Bihar State
Litigation Policy, 2011 under Chapter-IV and
the said pay scale has been granted to the
similarly situated persons by Resolution of the
Finance Department, Bihar bearing Memo
No. 163 dated 08.01.2016.
II. For commanding the respondents to
consider and grant the same pay scale, which
has been granted to the similarly situated
persons by its Memo No. 163 dated
08.01.2016 and Memo No. 2162 dated
28.02.2024, in view of the clause 4.C(1) of the
Bihar State Litigation Policy, 2011.
III. For commanding the respondents to
revised the pay scale accordingly and grant
all consequential benefit with retiral benefits.
IV. Any other relief or reliefs may be granted
to the petitioners as they are found legally
entitled to in the facts and circumstances of
the case.”
Patna High Court CWJC No.9360 of 2024(2) dt.17-02-2026
3/4
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that the
petitioners have filed their representations (Annexure-P/5 series)
and the same are still pending before the executive engineer.
4. Learned counsel for the State, on the other hand,
submits that this writ petition be dismissed as, during the
argument, counsel for the petitioners submit that the Principal
Secretary, PHED, Bihar, Patna is the competent authority to
decide the matter with regard to the petitioners, but the
petitioners have not filed their representation before the
Principal Secretary, PHED, Bihar, Patna, rather, filed before the
Executive Engineer.
5. In the light of the submissions made that claim of
the petitioners is completely based on the judgment passed by
this Hon’ble Court in case of Shashi Shekhar Ambastha & Ors.
Vs. The State of Bihar & Ors. in C.W.J.C. No. 18433 of 2016
with other analogous cases as well as in the light of the
Resolution of the Finance Department, Bihar contained in
Memo No. 163 dated 08.01.2016 as claimed by the petitioners,
it is therefore, hereby directed to the petitioners to file their
fresh representation along with a copy of this order before the
Principal Secretary, PHED, Bihar, Patna (Respondent no.2) who
shall pass a reasoned and speaking order on their fresh
Patna High Court CWJC No.9360 of 2024(2) dt.17-02-2026
4/4
representation in light of Clause 4.C of the Bihar State
Litigation Policy, 2011 considering the merit or demerit of the
petitioners’ claim, within 90 days from the date of receiving the
petitioners’ representation.
6. Accordingly, with the aforesaid direction, this writ
petition stands disposed off.
(Dr. Anshuman, J)
Divyansh/-
U
Checking your session…