IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 15870 of 2011 Pradip Sah S/O Late Janak Sah Resident Of Village-Phulwaria, Police Station Maniari, District-Muzaffarpur. ………………. Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Bihar Through The Commissioner-Cum-Secretary, Public Health Engineering Department, Government Of Bihar, Patna. 2. Engineer In Chief-Cum-Special Secretary, Public Health Engineering Department, Government Of Bihar, Patna. 3. Chief Engineer, Public Health Engineering Department, Government Of Bihar, Patna. 4. Superintending Engineer, Public Health Engineering Department, Government Of Bihar, Patna. 5. Executive Engineer, Public Health Engineering Department, Government Of Bihar, Patna. ……………….. Respondents ---------------------------------- 02. 16.11.2011 The relief prayed in the Writ Application is to direct the respondents to give him the benefit of pay due salary for the period he had worked under the work-charge-establishment, which is said to be from 01.06.2002 till his regularization in service with effect from 30.11.2006. There is no basic dispute that the petitioner was working in the work-charge-establishment of the respondents and after some round of litigation and assertion of his right, he came to be regularized in service on a decision taken by the State Government. Such a decision is reflected from Annexure- 5 to the Writ Application. Despite the decision of the State Government to regularize the service of the petitioner, certain anomalous situation was sought to be created because the Department was not wiling to take cognizance of the period of service he had rendered in the 2 work-charge-establishment i.e. from the year 2002 onwards. Since there were many persons involved in such an exercise affecting their right on this issue one employee decided to approach the High Court by filing C.W.J.C. No. 7178 of 2010, which was the case of Ram Krishna Tanti. This matter after hearing the parties to the dispute was decided on 02.02.2011 where a categorical direction was issued by the learned Single Judge to consider the past service of the petitioner rendered in the work-charge- establishment for the purposes of seniority and pay-scale etc. Respondents were directed to take a decision on this count in terms of the adjudication made by the learned Single Judge within a period of two months. A copy of the said Order has been produced before this Court by counsel representing the petitioner. A copy of this Order was also handed over to learned Additional Advocate General No. 14 to verify the assertion of the petitioner, whether the issue raised by him in the present Writ stands answered or covered by the said decision. After having gone through the Order of learned Single Judge in Ram Krishna Tanti, learned Additional Advocate General with due fairness does accept that the issue raised and decided in the case of Ram Krishna Tanti are identical and therefore there is no reason why the present petitioner would not be get similar relief in this regard. In the above stated accepted position and the decision to which this Court has also applied itself to the issues raised in Ram Krishna Tanti’s case, the present Writ Application 3 deserves to be allowed with a direction upon the respondent authorities to give the benefit of past service rendered by the petitioner in the work-charge-establishment. Consequences flowing therefrom will accrue to the petitioner preferably within a period of two months from the date of production of a copy of this Order. Accordingly, the Writ Application is allowed. SKM (Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J.)