IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.8184 of 2002 MD.ARIF IQUBALI, son of Late Maulvi Md.Zubair, resident of Village + Post Shahpur Baghauni (Tola Fazilpur), PS Tajpur (Waini, O.P.) District Samastipur. The Secretary of Managing Committee of Madarsa Islamia, Shahpur, Baghauni, Via-Waini, District Samastipur. ……….. Petitioner Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR through the Director, Secondary Education, Government of Bihar, Budh Marg, Patna 2. The Special Director, Secondary Education, Government of Bihar, Budh Marg, Patna 3. The Bihar State Madarsa Education Board, Budh Marg, Patna through its Chairman 4. The Secretary, Bihar State Madarsa Education Board, Budh Marg,Patna 5. Mohiuddin, son of Shah Ataul Hakum, resident of Village Mohammadpur Koari, PS Waini, District Samastipur ………… Respondents With CWJC No.7455 of 2003 MD.UMAIR, son of Md. Ekram, resident of Mohalla Shahpur Baghauni,Via-Waini,District Samastipur ………………. Petitioner Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR through the Director, Secondary Education, Government of Bihar, Budh Marg, Patna 2. The Special Director, Secondary Education, Government of Bihar, Budh Marg, Patna 3. The Bihar State Madarsa Education Board, Budh Marg, Patna through its Chairman 4. The Secretary, Bihar State Madarsa Education Board, Budh Marg,Patna 5. Md. Arif Irbali, son of Late Md. Zubair, the Secretary of Managing Committee of Madarsa Islamiya Sahpur Baghauyni, Via-Waini,District Samastipur 6. The District Education Officer, Samastipur 7. The Principal, Madarsa Islamia,Shahpur, Baghauni, Via- Waini, District Samastipur 8. Mohiuddin, son of Shah Ataul Hakeem, resident of Village Mohammadpur Koari, PS Waini, District Samastipur ………….Respondents ----------- CWJC No.3704 of 2004 MOHIUDDIN, son of Late Shah Ataul Hakeem, resident of Village Dih Koari, PS Pusa Road, District Samastipur, Assistant Teacher of Madarsa Islamia at Shahpur Baghauni, District Samastipur ………..Petitioner Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. The Special Director, Secondary Education, Patna 3. The District Education Officer, Samastipur 4. The Managing Committee of Madarsa Islamia at Shahpur Baghauni Disrtrict Samastipur through its Secretary 2 5. Md. Arif Equabali, son of Late Md.Zubair, residsent of Village and P.O. Shahp0ur Baghauni (Fazilpur Tola),District Samastipur ………. Respondents ----------- For the Petitioners: Mr Rajendra Pd. Singh, Sr. Advocate M/s Rajiv Kumar Singh & Nand Kishore Singh, Advocates (In CWJC 8184/2002) Mr S.A.Nasar Warsi,Advocate (In CWJC No. 3704/2004) For Madarsa Board: Mr Rashid Alam, Advocate For the State : Mr Sunil Kumar Mandal, SC 15 Mr Bipin Kumar, AC to SAC 15 ----- 4. 19.02.2009 Heard leaned Counsel for the petitioners, learned Counsel for the State, learned Counsel for the Bihar State Madarsa Education Board and for private respondent no. 5. CWJC No. 3704 of 2004 has been filed by the private respondent no. 5 in CWJC No. 8184 of 2992 seeking consequential relief for arrears of salary in pursuance of the order dated 24.6.2002 assailed in the former writ application by which the order of termination of private respondent no. 5 has been set aside. CWJC No. 7455 of 2003 has been preferred by the petitioner who has been appointed after the termination of respondent no. 5 in CWJC No. 8184 of 2002. Counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondent Madarsa Education Board. The original records have also been placed before the Court in pursuance of the order dated 12.2.2009. The aforesaid order dated 12.2.21009 had noticed the limited nature of the controversy. The contention of the petitioner was that the Chairman of the Madarsa Education Board was none other than the Special Director, Secondary Education, Government of Bihar in his ex-offitio capacity. He 3 heard the challenge to the termination order of respondent no. 5 issued by the institution in question as the Chairman of the Madarsa Board and affirmed it, whereafter sitting as the appellate authority the same very individual Special Director has passed the impugned order setting aside the termination. From the counter affidavit and the records of the respondent Board, this submission has become unsustainable. Undoubtedly, the removal of respondent no. 5 was challenged during tenure of one Sri Kumar Gauri Shankar Sinha, who was Special Director, Secondary Education, the ex-offitio Chairman of the Madarsa Board. However the proceedings before him remained inconclusive when one Sri Prof. Dr. Abdul Wahid Ansari assumed the post of Chairman of the Madarsa Education Board and it is he who passed the order approving the termination of the services of respondent no. 5 by the Institution in question. It is this order of the Chairman Prof. Ansari which is the subject matter of Appeal No. 10 of 2000. By the order dated 24.6.2002 the appellate authority, the Special Director, Secondary Education has held that the Managing Committee of the School erred in terminating the services of respondent no. 5 contrary to the principles of natural justice, without affording him reasonable opportunity. Consequential directions have then been issued in the appellate order to proceed afresh in accordance with law. This Court, therefore, finds no infirmity in the order requiring interference except to direct that the Managing 4 Committee must issue notice to the respondent no. 5, hear him and take a final decision thereupon by a reasoned and speaking order within a maximum period of four months. That disposes CWJC No. 8184 of 2002. The law stands settled that where an order is set aside on technicalities for non compliance of the principles of natural justice unless the order so specifically directs it does not consequentially and automatically result in reinstatement, especially when orders have been passed for proceeding afresh in accordance with law. In the present case, though there is a direction that respondent no. 5 shall continue to work, the fact of the matter, not in dispute before this Court during the present hearing, is that respondent no. 5 has not been reinstated in pursuance of the order. This Court, therefore, finds it difficult to grant him any relief in CWJC No. 3704 of 2004 on the principle of “no work no pay” when the mater shall finally abide by the fresh consideration and decision in accordance with law. In so far as the petitioner in CWJC No. 7455 of 2003 is concerned, he is stated to be the person appointed consequent to the termination of respondent no. 5 and whose appeal came to be allowed by Appeal No. 10 of 2000. If this Court did not find substance in the plea of respondent no. 5 for arrears of his salary in CWJC no. 8184 of 2002 on the principle of “no work no pay”, conversely the petitioner in CWJC No. 7455 of 2003 appointed in place of respondent no. 5 and has worked as such, he shall be entitled for his salary for the period that he worked 5 and the matter is left open to be factually examined by the concerned respondents more particularly when the appellate order restrains payment of salary to him exparte without impleading him as a party in Appeal No. 10/2000 much less hearing him, within a maximum period of four months from the date of receipt and/or production of a copy of this order. Snkumar/- (Navin Sinha,J.)