IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LPA No.238 of 2006 Tribhuwan Pandey son of Ram Kumar Pandey, resident of Village Rith, P.O. Rith Ka Tola, P.S. Rith Ka Tola, District Saran, at present Assistant Teacher, Lakshmi Narain Sanskrit Primary School, Ratanpura, P.S. Chapra, District Saran. Versus 1. The State of Bihar 2. The Chairman, Bihar Sanskrit Shiksha Board, Patna. 3. The Secretary, Bihar Sanskrit Shiksha Board, Patna. 4. Director, Secondary Education, Bihar, Patna. 5. Managing Committee, Lakshmi Narain Sanskrit Primary School, Ratanpura, P.S. Chapra town, District saran. 6. The Special Director, Secondary Education, Bihar, Patna. 7. The Commissioner-cum-Secretary, Human Resources Development Department, Patna. ----------- For the appellant : Mr. Rakesh Kumar Srivastava & Mr. Dineshwar Prasad Singh For the respondents 1,4, 6 & 7 : M/S. Tej Bahadur Singh, Sr. Advocate & S. S. Mishra For the respondent nos. 2 & 3: Mr. A. Amanullah, S.C. XVII & Mr. A. K. Prasad, J.C. to S.C.XVII ------- P R E S E N T Hon'ble the Chief Justice & Hon'ble Mr. Justice Kishore K. Mandal ------ Dated, 27th November, 2008 The writ petitioner is in appeal as his writ petition for quashing the orders dated 5th May, 1993 and 22nd May, 2002 has been rejected by the Single Judge by his order dated 15th February, 2006. The Single Judge held that the school, namely, Lakshmi Narain Sanskrit Prathmik Vidyalaya, Ratanpur, where the appellant (writ petitioner) is said to have worked has already been de-recognised and that the appellant worked in that school without any salary and, - 2 - therefore, there was no merit in the writ petition. 2. The contention of the counsel for the appellant is that although the initial appointment of the appellant in the said school was against the non-sanctioned post but later on upon the second sanctioned post having got vacated somewhere in the year 1989-90, the appellant was appointed against that post and, therefore, he was entitled to un-paid salary from the year 1990. 3. That Laxmi Narain Sanskrit Prathmik Vidyalaya, Ratanpur had two sanctioned posts of Sanskrit teachers is not in dispute. That the appellant was appointed in the said school against non sanctioned post is also not in dispute. It also does not seem to be in dispute that in the appointment order it is stated that the appellant would not be entitled to any salary until it is received from the University. He approached this Court by filing writ petition being C.W.J.C. No. 641 of 1990 claiming un-paid salary for the period from 1990. By way of an interim order, in that writ petition, the appellant was directed to make a representation to the Secretary-cum- Commissioner, Human Resources Development Department in respect of his grievance of unpaid salary. The Secretary, Human Resources Development Department in its order dated 19th January, 1991, on representation made by the appellant, issued direction to Laxmi Narain Sanskrit Prathmik Vidyalaya to appoint the appellant on the second sanctioned post and make payment accordingly. It appears that at the time the Secretary, Human Resources Development - 3 - Department passed the order dated 19th January, 1991, Laxmi Narain Sanskrit Prathmik Vidyalaya was already taken over by the State Government. In that view of the matter, this Court disposed of the writ petition being C.W.J.C. No. 641 of 1990 by directing the Secretary- cum-Commissioner, Human Resources Development Department to consider the appellant’s grievance appropriately. Pursuant to the order of this Court dated 22nd December, 1992 disposing of the appellant’s writ petition 641 of 1990, the Secretary, Human Resources Development Department considered the matter and it was held in the order dated 5th May, 1993 that since the school did not meet the pre- requisite qualification set by the State Government for recognition, none of its teachers was entitled to any salary. Thus, by the order dated 5th May, 1993, the claim of the appellant for un-paid salary was rejected by the Secretary, Human Resources Development Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. 4. The appellant yet filed another writ petition being C.W.J.C. No. 781 of 1995 challenging the order dated 5th May, 1993. This writ petition was dismissed by this Court as premature vide order dated 29th January, 1996 by observing that in case Laxmi Narain Sanskrit Prathmik Vidyalaya gets recognition and aid is granted to that school by the Government and, if salary is not paid to him, he can approach this Court again. 5. According to the petitioner, 429 Sanskrit schools were taken over by the State Government under the Bihar Non-Government - 4 - Sanskrit School (Taking over of Management and Control) Ordinance, 1989. Out of which, 86 schools including Laxmi Narain Sanskrit Prathmik Vidyalaya were denied grant in aid on the ground that these schools did not fulfill the requisite criterion for recognition. The appellant’s case is that the matter ultimately went to the Supreme Court concerning these 86 schools and pursuant to the order passed by the Supreme Court, the grant in aid was released by the State Government to these 86 schools including Laxmi Narain Sanskrit Prathmik Vidyalaya and the persons holding the sanctioned posts were paid their salary upto the year 1995 but the appellant, who was similarly situated, was not paid his salary. He approached this Court by filing another writ petition being C.W. J.C. No. 3914 of 1998. The said writ petition was disposed of on 15th September, 1999 by observing that the appellant may make a representation before the Special Director, Secondary Education, Government of Bihar. It was further observed that if the Special Director comes to the conclusion that Laxmi Narain Sanskrit Prathmik Vidyalaya meets the criteria for recognition and grant in aid has been released in favour of the said school, then he will pass appropriate order for payment of salary in favour of the petitioner, but if it is found that the said school did not meet the criteria for recognition and the Government has not released the grant in aid to the said school, the claim of the petitioner shall stand rejected. 6. The appellant pursuant to the liberty granted by this - 5 - Court in its order dated 15th September, 1999 made representation to the Special Director, Secondary Education, Government of Bihar. The Special Director considered the representation made by the appellant and held in its order dated 22nd May, 2002 that the appellant’s appointment was not against the sanctioned post. He further held that in the light of his appointment against non sanctioned post, the appellant was not entitled to any wages. 7. The appellant was not satisfied with the order of the Special Director, Secondary Education passed on 22nd May, 2002 and, accordingly, he filed a contempt petition being M.J.C. No. 2747 of 2000. The Single Judge of this Court held that the respondents could not be held guilty of any contempt and, accordingly, dismissed the contempt petition (M.J.C. No. 2747 of 2000) on 15th October, 2003. However, while doing that, it was observed that if the appellant was aggrieved by that order, he may challenge the same, if advised. It is, thus, that the appellant filed yet another writ petition being C.W.J.C. No. 4284 of 2004 challenging the order dated 22nd May, 2002. It is from the dismissal of this writ petition that present appeal arises. 8. The facts narrated by us above would amply indicate that the appellant has approached this Court for the same relief concerning unpaid salary from the year 1990 time and again. His representations made pursuant to the various orders of this Court have been considered by speaking orders by the concerned authorities and - 6 - no merit has been found in his claim of unpaid salary. We have already noticed above that the initial appointment of the appellant in Laxmi Narain Sanskrit Prathmik Vidyalaya, Ratanpur was not against the sanctioned post; rather he was appointed by the management of that school against non sanctioned post making it clear in the appointment order that until his salary is received from the University, he would continue to work without pay. Although the appellant has been claiming that after the second post became vacant, he was appointed against the second sanctioned post, but there is nothing on record to show that he was, in fact, appointed against the second sanctioned post. The order dated 19th January, 1991 passed by the Commissioner-cum-Secretary, Human Resources Development Department, Government of Bihar, stood superseded by the order dated 5th May, 1993 passed by the Secretary, Human Resources Development Department, Government of Bihar. Since the appellant’s appointment was not against the sanctioned post, obviously, the view of the Special Director, Secondary Education, Government of Bihar, that he was not entitled to any salary cannot be faulted. 9. Letters Patent Appeal has no merit. It is dismissed with no order as to cost. R.M.Lodha, CJ. Kishore K.Mandal, J. AMIN/