IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LPA No.760 of 2008 Arjun Prasad, son of Ram Chandra Prasad, resident of Mohalla – Malia Mahadev Maharajganj, P.s. – Alamganj, District – Patna ……………. Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Bihar, through its Secretary, Urban Development Department, Government of Bihar, Patna 2. The Patna Municipal Corporation, through its Chief Executive Officer, Patna 3. The Chief Executive Officer, Patna Municipal Corporation, Patna ……….. Respondents 4. Mudrika Prasad, son of Raghunandan Prasad, resident of Mohalla – Tulsi Mandi, Gulzarbagh, P.S. – Alamganj, District – Patna ……..Petitioner no.2/Performa Respondent ----------- For the appellant : Mr. Sheel Bhadra Jha, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Chandrashekhar, Senior Advocate Mr. Bishwa Bibhuti Kumar Singh, Advocate --------- P R E S E N T Hon'ble the Chief Justice & Hon'ble Mr. Justice Kishore K. Mandal ----------- Dated, the 29th September, 2008. We heard the counsel for the appellant. 2. The Single Judge considered the matter thus: “The Court finds from perusal of annexure – 6 that the replacement pay scale of the petitioners from Rs.775-1025 is Rs.2550-3200 and this pay scale is being given to them. In the opinion of this Court by granting the revised pay scale in terms of annexure – 6 and not entertaining the claim of the petitioners for a higher replacement pay scale in terms of annexure -5, the respondents have committed no illegality. Petitioners have not made out a case for application of the replacement pay scale at par with the so called wiremen of other departments of the State Government. In the opinion of the Court, therefore the relief prayed for cannot be granted to the petitioners.” - 2 - 3. There is no justifiable reason to take a view different from the Single Judge. 4. Letters Patent Appeal has no merit. It is dismissed in limine. R. M. Lodha, CJ. Kishore K. Mandal, J. Anil/