IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.9619 of 2010 1. RAM BILASH RAM, S/O LATE JAMUN RAM, R/O VILLAGE MOHANPUR, P.S. BIDUPUR, DISTRICT- VAISHALI. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR. 2. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF LABOUR RESOURCES, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA.(FORMERLY KNOWN AS COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY,DEPARTMENT OF LABOUR, EMPLOYMENT AND TRAINING,GOVT. OF BIHAR,PATNA.) 3. THE DIRECTOR, EMPLOYMENT AND TRAINING EMPLOYMENT AND TRAINING DIRECTORATE, BIHAR, PATNA. 4. THE DIRECTOR, SOCIAL SECURITY, SOCIAL SECURITY DIRECTORATE, BIHAR, PATNA. 5. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ARARIA. 6. THE DEPUTY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSIONER, ARARIA. 7. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, SUPAUL. 8. THE DEPUTY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSIONER, SUPAUL. ----------- 2 18.04.2011 As rightly observed by one of the learned Judges of this Court (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.) in his order dated 04.02.2009 passed in CWJC No.1764 of 2009 for any claim for payment of salary an incumbent has to satisfy that he was appointed in accordance with law following the mandate of Article 14 of the Constitution; he was appointed against the vacant sanctioned post and he was actually working during the relevant period. Petitioner’s prayer in this case is for a direction to the respondents to pay his arrears of salary for the period 01.04.2005 2 to 11.08.2006. To get the same, petitioner has to satisfy the authorities that he was actually working during this period. Counter affidavit has been filed and learned counsel for the respondents relies on an order of this Court passed by a learned Single Judge in CWJC No.17746 of 2009 where the claim of the petitioner was denied on the principle of ‘no work no pay.’ He also refers to an order passed by a Division Bench in LPA No.752 of 2010 in which the said order of the learned Single Judge was affirmed. He also submits that when the petitioner was subsequently absorbed in regular service, after close of the scheme in which he was appointed, he had given an undertaking that he will not claim any salary of the previous period. These matters are question of fact and essentially required to be considered by the respondent Collector, Araria. In the circumstances, petitioner is given liberty to file a representation before the Collector, Araria making such claim for payment of salary of the said period. The Collector will look into the matter and if he 3 finds that the petitioner had actually worked during this period under the valid orders of the competent authority and he had not given any undertaking not to claim for salary and there is no legal impediment, he shall pass appropriate orders on his representation for release of the salary within two months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order along with the representation. The writ application is disposed of with the aforesaid observations and directions. Arvind/ ( J. N. Singh, J.)