IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.14319 of 2009 1. BHUWANESHWAR PRASAD SINGH S/O RAGHAV SINGH VILL & P.O. GEHUNI, P.S. BHAGWANPUR, DISTT. BEGUSARAI, RETIRED WHILE WORKING AS AN ASSTT. TEACHER FROM GOVT. MIDDLE SCHOOL- BANWARIPUR, ANCHAL- BHAGWANPUR, DISTT. BEGUSARAI Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT DEPTT., GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA 3. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY FINANCE DEPTT., GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA 4. THE DEPUTY SECRETARY FINANCE (PAY FIXATION) DEPTT., GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA 5. THE DIRECTOR, PRIMARY EDUCATION BIHAR, PATNA 6. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE BEGUSARAI 7. THE DEPUTY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSIONER-CUM- CHAIRMAN DISTRICT EDUCATION ESTABLISHMENT COMMITTEE, BEGUSARAI 8. THE DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF EDUCATION MUNGER 9. THE DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF EDUCATION BEGUSARAI 10. THE DISTRICT TREASURY OFFICER BEGUSARAI 11. THE DISTRICT ACCOUNTS OFFICER BEGUSARAI 12. THE HEADMASTER CUM DRAWING AND DISBURSING OFFICER OF GOVT. MIDDLE SCHOOL - BANWARIPUR ANCHAL- BHAGWANPUR, DISTT. BEGUSARAI ----------- 2 1.2.2010 Heard Counsel for the petitioner and the Counsel appearing for the State. Petitioner was initially appointed as an Assistant (Science Teacher) on stipend of Rs.150/- vide order dated 3.10.1973 contained in memo no. 2162. This appointment was made after due advertisement and the interview required for the legal appointment. However, petitioner only received stipend of Rs.150/- for the period 16.10.1973 to 2 3.12.1974. He was given regular scale with effect from 3.12.1974. The period during which he only received stipend was also not counted for his seniority and other benefits. The issue for consideration in this writ application has already been decided by this Court in the case of Yogendra Raut i.e. CWJC No. 3633 of 1994, where it has been held as follows: “In my opinion, that would amount to regularizing the services of the concerned teachers. Initial appointment having been made according to the prescribed procedure. I see no reason why the teachers should be denied the benefit of continued officiation in shape of seniority, pay etc. In that view of the matter the stand of the respondents to treat the petitioner as appointee from 9.11.1974 and to deny him the benefits of the revised scale applicable from 1.10.1975 cannot be said to be in accordance with law.” Several other writ applications have also been decided in the similar matter, as such the application is being allowed giving direction to the District Superintendent of Education, Begusarai to consider the case of the petitioner and allow him similar benefit, as has been allowed by this Court in 3 the writ application of Yogendra Raut. All consequential benefits should be allowed to the petitioner within a period four weeks, from the date of production/communication of this order. (Mridula Mishra,J.) A.Kumar