IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.7714 of 2002 1. SHYAM BIHARI CHAUBEY son of late Kripal Chaubey. 2. Ram Sunder Chaudhary son of Sri Bigu Chaudhary. 3. Uma Shanker Chaudhari son of Shiv Lakhan Chaudhary 4. Hare Ram Sharma son of late Baijnath Sharma 5. Mahendra Nath Singh son of Sita Ram Singh 6. Sri Narayan Mishra son of late Kedar Nath Mishra 7. Dr. Jagdish Singh son of late Banbari Singh 8. Dr. Om Prakash Singh son of Sri Triloki Nath Singh 9. Sri Ram Pandey son of late Dudhnath Pandey 10. Dr. Sri Kant Chaubey son of Sri Uma Shanker Chaubey. 11. Suresh Upadhyay son of late Saryug Prasad Upadhyay 12. Shidheshwar Tiwari son of Ram Nath Tiwari 13. shivji Yadav son of Igrasan Yadav 14. Pashupati Paswan son of late Shivbalak Paswan 15. Ganga Prasad Pandey son of Trivedi Pandey 16. Dharnidhar Chaubey son of late Shiv Shankar Chaubey 17. Binod Kumar Gupta son of Sri Yogendra Prasad Gupta 18. Shivmangal Singh son of Radha Kisun Singh 19. Ramji Prasad son of late Sri Ram Prasad 20. Shyam Bihari Pandey son of Sri Ram Pratap pandey 21. Satya Narain Chaurasiya son of late Ram Chandra Chaurasia. 22. Badri Narayan Singh son of Parikha Sah 23. Saroj Ojha wife of Bhupendra Nath Ojha 24. Bhuneshwar Mishra son of Shiv Kumar Mishra 25. Dinanath Singh son of late Ramdayal Singh 26. Triloki Nath Tiwari son of Girija Nand Tiwari 27. Arun Kumar Tiwari son of late Jori Lal Tiwari 28. Awadh Bihari Singh son of late Ram Darash Singh 29. Ghanshyam Dubey son of late Ram Niwas Dubey 30. Ram Dular Singh son of Ramnath Singh 31. Madhuri Devi wife of Ram Chandra Mishra 32. Indu Kumari wife of Kashi Nath Mishra 33. Bijay Shankar Pandey son of late Baleshwar Pandey 34. Narbdeshwar Upadhyay son of Banarsi Upadhyay 35. Baban Thakur son of Late Damri Thakur 36. Ramashray Singh son of Late Shivdhari Singh 37. Dr. Rajendra Prasad son of late Anant Verma 38. Dwarika Nath Pandey son of late Sudama Dubey All are working in Govt. Dhanwantari Ayurvedic College, Ahirauli, Buxar. … Petitioners. 2 Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. The Secretary, Department of Health, Medical Education and Family Welfare, Government of Bihar, Patna. 3. The Additional Secretary, Department of Health, Medical Education and Family Welfare, Government of Bihar, Patna. 4. The Director, Deshi Chikitsa, Government of Bihar, Patna. 5. the Principal, Government Dhanwantri Ayurvedic College, Ahirauli, Buxar. … Respondents. ------------- 13. 12.08.2010 Heard Mr. Sanjay Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioners and Assistant counsel to AAG 2 for the State. Though the prayer of the petitioners in this writ petition as originally made read as follows; “1. That this is an application for issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the respondents to pay salary of the petitioner from September, 2001 till date and further for issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the respondents to pay the petitioners’ salary on month to month basis.” but then the counsel for the petitioner would submit that since during the pendency of this writ petition certain payment and salary has been made to the petitioners, their claim now remains confined only to payment of salary for the period September 2001 to March 2002 and again for the period November 2002 to August 2003. 3 Counsel for the petitioners in this regard would submit that there is no dispute with regard to the petitioners’ working in the college or being entitled to receive payment of salary for the said period inasmuch as their services were terminated after the month of August 2003. It has also been stated that eight of the petitioners have also been absorbed in service after screening and submission of the report by the Review Committee. In this context, he would also refer to two communications of the Principal of Rajkiya Shridhavantir Ayurved Mahavidyalaya and Chikitsalay Buxar, Arauli dated 11.4.2007 and 27.11.2009 whereby and whereunder the requisition of fund for payment of salary has been made by him from the Director Indigenous Medicine, Government of Bihar. Counsel for the State would submit that the question of payment of salary would arise only to such persons who have either worked or their appointment was held to be valid and legal. He has further submitted that consideration for payment of salary of each of the petitioners has to be gone into in the light of the report of the Principal with regard to their actual working and also 4 entitlement as was decided by the Committee constituted by the State Government. In the opinion of this Court, the issue of payment of salary has two clear component namely, payment of arrears and current salary. The arrears of salary for the period the petitioners or some of them have continued in service has to be adjudicated and decided by the authority in the light of the report of their working and/or entitlement. There could be no a blanket stay for payment of salary of the persons whose service were not even terminated. The other aspect which would really make the case of the petitioners at least worth consideration is that they had admittedly received payment of salary for the interregnum period from the funds of the State Government and thus it would not be possible to hold that they would become disentitle for payment of salary either for the earlier period or the later period unless their services were never recognized by the authorities. All these aspects therefore have to be looked into by the Director Indigenous Medicine, who upon receipt of individual representation by the petitioners enclosing the proof of their working would take a 5 decision for payment of salary for the remaining period for which this writ petition has been pressed by the petitioners. Such decision however must be taken by the Director, Indigenous Medicine within a period of three months from the date of receipt of representation of the petitioners along with a copy of this order and necessary payment, if any, be also made to them in next three months. Let it however be made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the claim of the petitioners and has simply disposed of the matter for taking an expeditious decision on the issue of admissible payment of salary of the petitioners. With the aforementioned observation and direction, this writ petition is disposed of. kanchan/ (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)