Patna High Court
Shiopujan BaithaversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
Holding
The Court held that the appellant’s promotion grievance has been substantially satisfied by the Department’s Notification Memo No. 2558, and therefore the Letters Patent Appeal is disposed of.
Summary
Shiopujan Baitha, an 80‑year‑old pensioner, appealed to the Patna High Court against an order dated 9 May 2024 that dismissed his contempt petition concerning his promotion grievance. The appellant claimed that the respondents, senior officials of the Bihar Agriculture Department, failed to implement the court’s earlier directive to grant him promotion to Additional Agriculture Director with retrospective effect. The respondents filed a supplementary affidavit stating that, following a court order dated 31 March 2026, the Department issued Notification Memo No. 2558 on 16 April 2026 granting the appellant the promotion, creating a supernumerary post and extending all consequential benefits. The Court observed that the appellant’s grievance was substantially addressed by this notification. It directed the appellant, if still aggrieved, to file a representation before the competent authority, which may extend the benefits if he is found entitled, and consequently disposed of the Letters Patent Appeal.
Issues considered
- What is the effect of the Department’s Notification Memo No. 2558 dated 16 April 2026 on the appellant’s grievance regarding his promotion?
- Whether the contempt petition dismissed on 9 May 2024 can be revived or the appellant can seek further relief?
- Whether the appellant is entitled to any additional relief beyond the notification, and the appropriate forum for such representation.
Subjects
- promotion
- contempt petition
- letters patent appeal
- retrospective promotion
- administrative law
- representation
- grievance redressal
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Letters Patent Appeal No.594 of 2024
In
Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.2078 of 2018
======================================================
Shiopujan Baitha, aged about 80 years, Gender-Male, S/o Late Morha Baitha,
Resident of Mohalla- Adarsh Colony, West Patel Nagar, Post office- Shastri
Nagar, Police Station- Shastri Nagar, District- Patna, PIN- 800023.
... ... Appellant
Versus
1. The State of Bihar.
2. Sri Sudhir Kumar Singh, Agriculture Production Commissioner, Bihar,
Patna.
3. Sri Sudhir Kumar, Principal Secretary, Department of Agriculture, Bihar,
Patna.
4. The Finance Commissioner, Bihar, Patna.
5. The Accountant General, Bihar, Patna.
6. The Joint Secretary, Department of Agriculture, Bihar, Patna.
7. The Deputy Secretary, Department of Agriculture, Bihar, Patna.
8. Shri G.P. Singh, Public Information Officer, Department of Agriculture,
Bihar, Patna.
... ... Respondents
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant : Mrs. Shama Sinha, Advocate, Mr. Vijayansh Pratap
Singh, Advocate and Mr. Surya Prakash, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Tej Pratap Singh, A.C. to A.A.G.-13.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RANJAN KUMAR JHA
ORAL ORDER
(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH)
6 16-06-2026 Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned
counsel for the State.
2. The following reliefs have been sought by the
appellant in the present Letters Patent Appeal.
“1. The instant Letters Patent Appeal is
directed against the order dated 09.05.2024
Patna High Court L.P.A No.594 of 2024(6) dt.16-06-2026
2/4
passed in contempt petition being M.J.C. No.
2078/2018 in a very peculiar facts and
circumstances of the case, whereby the
opposite party no. 2 even though failed to
pass the final order in compliance of the
order under contempt, yet the Hon’ble Mr.
Justice Rajiv Roy Single Judge disposed off
the contempt on being satisfied that order of
writ court stands complied and further
observed that if petitioner still has grievance
can move before any appropriate writ court
for redressal of his grievances. As such, the
impugned order is against the material
available on record and the petitioner is
rendered remediless in absence of any such
order for challenge before writ court and in
consequence thereto, the opposite parties/
respondents may be called upon to notify the
final decisions taken upon the
recommendation of DPC to shift back the
date of promotions on the post of Additional
Director from 14.01.1997 to 31.12.1990 with
all consequential benefits or in alternative,
the contempt petition may be directed to be
restored to its original file for ensuring its
compliance.”
3. A supplementary counter affidavit has been filed on
behalf of respondent nos. 2, 3, 6, 7 and 8, wherein following
statements have been made:
Patna High Court L.P.A No.594 of 2024(6) dt.16-06-2026
3/4
“9. That it is submitted that pursuant to the
order dated 31.03.2026 passed by this
Hon’ble Court, and in compliance of the
expectation expressed therein, the matter
was reconsidered at the highest level and the
competent authority has now issued a
notification bearing Memo No. 2558 dated
16.04.2026.
10. That by the aforesaid notification dated
16.04.2026, issued by the Agriculture
Department, Government of Bihar, the claim
of the petitioner has been duly considered
and decided, whereby:
a) The petitioner has been granted regular
promotion on the post of Additional
Agriculture Director and Equivalent post,
b) the said promotion has been granted
with retrospective effect for the period from
31.12.1990 to 31.03.1997,
c) A supernumerary post has been created
for the said purpose,
d) The petitioner has been extended all
admissible consequential benefits, in
accordance with rules.”
4. Upon perusal of the aforesaid statement, it appears
that the grievance raised by the appellant stands substantially
addressed.
5. However, if the appellant is still aggrieved, he shall
Patna High Court L.P.A No.594 of 2024(6) dt.16-06-2026
4/4
be at liberty to file a representation before the competent
authority in light of the aforesaid Notification bearing Memo
No. 2558 dated 16.04.2026.
6. In the event of any such representation being filed,
the concerned authority shall consider the same in accordance
with law and extend the benefit of the aforesaid notification to
the appellant, if found entitled, within a reasonable period from
the date of receipt of the representation.
7. With the aforesaid liberty, the present Letters Patent
Appeal stands disposed of.
8. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand
disposed of.
(Sudhir Singh, J)
(Ranjan Kumar Jha, J)
U.K./-
U
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.