IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.8914 of 2002 1. JAGDIPAN PD.SINGH, son of Shri Maldeo Ram, resident of Durga Asthan, Katihar, P.S. and District Katihar at present posted as an Assistant Teacher, Middle School, Mohanpur, P.S. Mansahi, District Katihar 2. Indradeo Purbey, son of Shri Anandi Purbey, resident of Nayatola Katihar, District Katihar at present posted as an Assistant Teacher Middle Seacher, Middle School Nikhra, P.S. Kadwa, District Katihar … Petitioners Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. The Director, Primary Education, Bihar, Patna 3. The Secretary, Primary and Adult Education, Bihar, Patna 4. The Regional Deputy Director of Education, Purnia Division, Purnia 5. The District Superintendent of Education, Katihar 6. The Addl. Finance Commissioner, Finance Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna 7. The District Treasury Officer, Katihar … Respondents ----------- 6. 16.7.2010 Heard counsel for the petitioners and the counsel for the State. On the last occasion when it was found that the counter affidavit had not been filed despite repeated indulgences and in fact expiry of almost eight years from the date of filing of the writ application, this Court was constrained to seek an explanation from the Director, Primary Education, directing him to also appear in person. Mr. Ashutosh, Director, Primary Education, has appeared in person and has 2 filed his show cause apart from the counter affidavit. In the show cause he has given total statistics with regard to pendency of the cases and number of counter affidavits. It would not be necessary to record them in this order but then Annexure R-2/B itself would be reflective of the fact that at least in 50% of the cases counter affidavits are yet to be filed. The Director, Primary Education, however, assures this Court that he is going to personally involve himself in this task and he expects that by laying some methodology this malady of not filing of the counter affidavit would be rectified in near future. Considering that there are huge number of cases awaiting filing of counter affidavit this Court would give one more indulgence to the Director, Primary Education as it is trust and hope of this Court in the present Director, Primary Education that he will stand to his words and under taking given to this Court in his show cause reply filed today. With these observations, the personal appearance of the Director, Primary 3 Education is hereby dispensed with. Coming to the merits of this case it would be found from the counter affidavit that the following grievance of the petitioners as claimed in paragraph 1 of the writ application: “This writ application is being filed for an appropriate writ, order or direction to quash the order issued under the signature of respondent no.5 contained in Memo No. 1812 dated 1.7.2002 whereby and whereunder the direction has been issued to pay the Matric untrained scale of Rs. 3050- 4590 to the untrained teachers possessing higher qualification of graduation or above as it is in the teeth of order/ direction of the Finance Department, Govt. of Bihar issued under the signature of Addl. Finance Commissioner contained in order dated 25.1.2002. The petitioners pray for any other relief or reliefs to which they are fit and entitled.” has been said to have been redressed. Mr. Prem Chand, the District Superintendent of Education, Katihar (respondent no.5), who is also present in person, has personally sworn counter 4 affidavit wherein it has been stated as follows: “2. That the present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner for quashing the order contained in Memo no. 1812 dated 1.7.2002 passed by the respondent no.5, whereby direction was issued to pay the Matric untrained sacle of Rs. 3050- 4500 to the untrained teachers. 3. That the issues raised by the petitioner and the reliefs sought for by the petitioner was policy matter. It was heard and by the order of Finance Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna through letter no. 7778/v/(2) dated 7.10.2003, the recovery of excess payment made to the untrained primary teachers were stayed. 4. That it is being humbly submitted that both the petitioners are getting trained scale after passing their training examination from July, 2005 and as such, the grievance of the petitioners has been redressed. 5. That it is humbly submitted that since the grievance of the petitioners has been fully redressed, parawise reply is not being made in this counter affidavit however the answering respondent undertakes to give 5 parawise reply of and when is directed to do so by this Hon’ble Court.” Counsel for the petitioners would submit that he would require time to verify the stand taken by the District Superintendent of Education as with regard to alleged redressal of grievance of the petitioners. In the opinion of this Court there would be no need for adjourning the case for such verification, inasmuch as the respondent District Superintendent of Education, Katihar also present in the Court with the Director of Primary Education is a responsible officer and is supposed to state only true and correct facts in a court of law. If, however, it is subsequently found by this Court that the D.S.E., Katihar had made a false statement in his counter affidavit as with regard to redressal of the grievance of the petitioners, this Court on being filed a contempt application by the petitioners would deal with him and pass appropriate order in accordance with law. With the aforementioned observations, this application is finally 6 disposed of. Let a copy of this order be given to the learned counsel for the State for its being transmitted to the Director, Primary Education, for its strict compliance. (Mihir Kumar Jha,J.) Surendra/