IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.4664 of 2002 SHEO SHAMBHU MISHRA, son of late Gorakh Nath Mishra, Assistant Teacher Dandi Swami Sanskrit Prathmik Sah Madhya Vidyalaya, Kastar, Rohtas, Police Station- Bikramganj, District- Rohtas… Petitioner. Versus 1. THE CHAIRMAN CUM DIRECTOR,BIHAR Sanskrit Shiksha Board, Rajapur, Patna. 2. The Secretary, Bihar Sanskrit Shiksha Board, Near Rajapur Pul, Patna. 3. The District Education Officer, Rohtas. … Respondents. ----------- 5. 05.07.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. The prayer in this writ petition reads as follows:- “ 1. That this writ application is for a direction to respondent no. 1 and 2 to pay the salary of petitioner for the year 1997- 1998, 1998-1999, 1999-2000, 2000-2001 and 2001-2002 and//or for any other appropriate writ order/direction as your lordship may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.” With the regard to the aforementioned prayer, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that it is only due to lack of Last Pay Certificate of the petitioner, that the payment of salary of the petitioner for certain stretch of period has not been paid. He would submit that the petitioner has therefore been compelled to work 2 without actual payment of salary for none of his fault. Counsel for the Board would point out that in the counter- affidavit he has already enclosed the full details of the last salary drawn by the petitioner and in this context, he has referred to the letter of the Secretary of the Board as contained in Memo No. 466 dated 7.3.2007. In the said communication, the Secretary to the Board has clarified that the basis pay of the petitioner on 1.4.1986 was Rs.555/- and on 1.4.1997 was Rs.675/- on which he was also entitled for grant of Rs.609/- as dearness allowance. Counsel for the petitioner would point out that the certificate issued by the Board through communication to the District Education Officer has not been treated as LPC and as a result thereof the payment of salary has been withheld. In the opinion of this Court, the concept of LPC in private Sanskrit School cannot be enforced. Such LPC in fact can be only issued in case of a government servant by the proper controlling authority governed by the Bihar Treasury Code and Bihar Financial Rules. A teacher of recognised Sanskrit School though receiving 3 payment of salary by way of grant an aid from the funds of the State Government is not a government servant for whom the government rules including that L.P.C. can be made applicable. Nonetheless, as the petitioner’s salary would depend on his earlier salary received by him and the Board has fully clarified this aspect in its order dated 7.3.2007 (Annexure-A), this Court would direct the Respondent no. 3 to make verification of the document in question, Annexure- A, from the authorities of the Board. The respondent no. 3 will however ensure that whatever steps for payment of salary to the petitioner has to be taken must be completed only on the basis of communication of the Board dated 7.3.2007 and that too within a period of three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. With the aforementioned observation and direction, this writ petition is disposed of. kanchan/ (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)