IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC NO.6811 OF 2007 LAKSHMAN PRASAD SINGH,S/O SHRI RAM SINGHASAN SINGH, R/O VILLAGE CHINTAMANPUR, P.O. GOROUL, P.S VAISHALI, DISTRICT VAISHALI. …………………PETITIONER. VERSUS 1.THE STATE OF BIHAR. 2.THE SECRETARY, HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT (PRIMARY)DEPARTMENT, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA. 3.THE DIRECTOR, PRIMARY EDUCATION, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA. 4.THE DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF EDUCATION, VAISHALI, HAJIPUR. ………………………RESPONDENTS. ----------- 02/ 20.09.2011 Having heard counsel for the parties and taking into account that the petitioner’s initial appointment was made on stipend of Rs. 160 per month on the basis of his possessing qualification of I.Sc trained with a clear stipulation that he will be ultimately entitled to the post of Matric trained teacher and its pay scale, the rest of the grievance of the petitioner as with regard to shifting his original appointment on the post of teacher in the I.Sc trained scale seems to be wholly misconceived. The petitioner with his open eyes had accepted his appointment in the pay scale of Matric trained which was the basic 2 post and from which promotion was to be earned after completing minimum ‘kalawadhi’ of eight years. Therefore, if the post of I.Sc trained teacher was merged with the Matric trained w.e.f., 01.01.1986, the date on which the petitioner had not even completed the period of eight years in the Matric trained scale of pay, in view of his appointment in the Matric trained post w.e.f., 01.03.1981, this Court would find no flaw in the impugned order rejecting the claim of the petitioner for grant of I.Sc trained scale of pay w.e.f. 01.03.1981. As a matter of fact, the grievance raised by the petitioner after 24 years of his appointment and that too when he had already been given the equivalent pay scale of I.Sc trained scale after completion of his 12 years of service has been fully explained in the counter affidavit. This Court would find no merit in this writ application as with regard to the prayer made therein. The fact, however, remains that the petitioner still continues in service and after merger of the Matric trained scale 3 with I.Sc trained scale w.e.f, 01.01.1986, all such incumbent would be entitled for the direct promotion in the B.Sc trained scale of pay. Counsel for the petitioner is not aware as with regard to the case of the petitioner for his grant of B.Sc trained scale of pay and whether it has been considered and given or rejected in the case of the petitioner. The learned counsel for the State in the counter affidavit filed today has also not explained this aspect though the same was sworn on 10.01.2011. In such circumstance, as the grievance of the petitioner now would at best remain confined to his consideration for promotion in the B.Sc trained scale of pay if the petitioner would file his representation giving details of his claim, the Competent Authority namely the District Education Establishment Committee headed by the Collector of the Vaishali district would take an appropriate decision in the light of the directions given in the case of Ram Nath Prasad Singh vs The State of Bihar and Ors, reported in 2009(3) PLJR 4 384. If such exercise has already been completed in the case of the petitioner, the Establishment Committee will only communicate its decision to the petitioner through the district Programme Officer (Establishment), Vaishali, the Member Secretary of the Establishment Committee. Such an exercise, as directed above, must be completed within a period of six months from the date of filing of the representation of the petitioner enclosing a copy of this order. With the aforementioned observation and direction, this application is disposed of. Ranjan (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)