IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CIVIL WRIT JURISDICTION CASE No.12391 of 2011 Md.Isha Sabir son of Md. Jamal resident of Village Bauharwa, P.O.-Belhai, P.S.Maheshi, District- Saharsa. Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. The Principal Secretary-cum-Commissioner Primary Secondary and Adult Education, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 3. The Director Primary Education, Government of Bihar, Patna. 4. The District Magistrate, Saharsa, District-Saharsa. 5. The Regional Deputy Director of Education Koshi Division, Saharsa, District-Saharsa. 6. The District Education Officer, Saharsa, District- Saharsa. 7. The District Superintendent of Education, Saharsa, Dist.-Saharsa. ---------------------------------- 2. 04.08.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned counsel appearing for the State. The prayer in the writ petition is for quashing of letter dated 16.07.2010 issued by the D.S.E. Saharsa by which promotion to the petitioner has been denied. Learned counsel submits that he is not contesting with regard to grant of promotion. He draws the attention of this Court to the earlier order of the D.S.E. Saharsa contained in Memo No. 179-2 (Ni), dated 19.01.2008 by which the petitioner has been held entitled to the scale of graduate trained as well as that of Headmaster from 1.04.1986 and 15.08.1992 respectively. He submits that when the petitioner was denied these 2 two scales of pay in spite of the fact that juniors had arleady been granted, he moved this Court in C.W.J.C. No. 14402 of 2001 which was permitted to be withdrawn on 8.12.2009 in view of the aforementioned letter dated 19.01.2008. It was further directed by this Court in that writ petition that pursuant to that order, the petitioner shall be paid all his arrears as soon as possible. He submits that on the one hand such order has not been complied and on the other hand the respondents have proceeded on an erroneous presumption that the matter concerned is of promotion with retrospective effect. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, this Court feels that the submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner is justified. The order impugned dated 16.07.2010 does not take notice of the fact that earlier by order as contained in the aforesaid memo dated 19.01.2008, the petitioner has already been granted the benefit of the said two scales and in the impugned order the same has neither been noticed nor withdrawn nor even held to be not applicable. In that view of the matter, the impugned Annexure dated 16.07.2010 cannot be sustained and is accordingly set aside. Since the order contained in the memo dated 19.1.2008 which has been annexed as Annexure-4 to the writ petition still holds and has been 3 noticed earlier by this Court and has not yet been withdrawn, the respondents no. 6 and 7 or the newly designated officials who have stepped into their shoes are directed to ensure that the actual benefits according to the said order contained in Memo dated 19.1.2008 is paid to the petitioner which was earlier also directed by order of this Court by order dated 8.12.2009 in C.W.J.C. No. 14402 of 2001, within a maximum period of three months from the date of production/receipt of a copy of this order. With the aforementioned observations and directions this writ petition stands allowed to the extent indicated above. Anand Kr. ( Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J.)