IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.11018 of 2010 ====================================================== 1. Piyus Kumar Pandey S/O Sri Devendra Narayan Pandey R/O Vill.- Khojbalia, P.S. Brahmpur, Distt.- Buxar .... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. Principal Secretary, Department Of Panchayati Raj, Govt. Of Bihar, Patna 3. District Magistrate, Buxar 4. Block Development Officer, Brahmpur, Distt.- Buxar 5. Mukhiya, Kutchery Gram Panchayat, Bairiya, Brahmpur, Distt.- Buxar 6. Smt. Gouri Dubey, Sarpanch, Kutchery Gram Panchayat, Bairiya, Brahmpur, Distt.- Buxar .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Abhinay Raj For the Respondent/s : Mr. (Sc2) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN SINHA ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN SINHA) 2 14-11-2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. The petitioner claims to be a Nyayamitra working since 28.3.2008 and claims that salary has not been paid to him. He asserts at paragraph-10 that the amount payable has been sanctioned, allotted and sent to the Block Development Officer, (Gram Kutchery), but has not been paid as yet. He is entitled to his dues under Rule-9 from the Sarpanch/Deputy Sarpanch. Learned counsel for the State submits that the petitioner has a remedy under Rule-12 of the Bihar Gram Patna High Court CWJC No.11018 of 2010 (2) dt.14-11-2011 2 Kutchery Nyayamitra (Appointment, Service Conditions and Duties) Rules before the Sub-divisional Officer to ventilate his grievance. Rule-12 provides that any complaint with regard to a Nyayamitra appointed on contract may be raised before the Sub-divisional Officer. The Court is satisfied that the language used is wide enough to include a complaint with regard to non-payment of salary by a Nyayamitra validly appointed and it cannot be confined to allegations questioning the appointment only. The Court further finds at Rule-8 that the honorarium payable to a Nyayamitra is Rs.2500/- only. The Court fee for a writ petition itself is Rs.250/- apart from the other necessary and incidental expenses which can be charged even by a benevolent counsel, the total expenditure approximately comes at a minimum of Rs.1500/-. If the petitioner is a valid appointee unless the respondents have already held so in accordance with law there can be no justification for denial of wages to him expeditiously in accordance with law. The petitioner is stated to have filed an application before the Sub-divisional Officer on 29.6.2009. If it has been disposed and no appeal has been filed against it under Rule-13, the Court directs the Sub-divisional Officer to appropriately resort to the provisions of civil and/or Criminal Procedure Code under the laws of the land with Patna High Court CWJC No.11018 of 2010 (2) dt.14-11-2011 3 regard to those who may not be complying his orders if they are not in government service and bring it to the attention of the State Government immediately if they are in government service. If any appeal has been preferred under Rule-13 by the concerned against any final orders of the Sub-divisional Officer, the matter shall have to abide by the same. The Court cannot help but express its anxiety that in this writ petition filed on 15.7.2010 after serving two copies of the same in the office of the Advocate General for a summary issue of honorarium, no counter affidavit has been filed till date by the official respondents. The Court is not satisfied to issue notice to the erstwhile Sarpanch as suggested on behalf of the State as it is satisfied that it would be virtually sending the petitioner on merry go round where he may end up in an exasperation. The writ application is disposed. Krishna Chandra Jha/- (Navin Sinha, J)