IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.10683 of 2002 1. Sri Abhiram Das, husband of deceased petitioner no.1 Pratima Kumari , at present resident of Narghoghi, Police Station- Sarai, Ranjan District- Samastipur. 2. Krishna Kant Rai, son of Late Karai Rai, resident of village- Bharso, P.S.- Parwata, District- Khagaria, at present Assistant Teacher in Shri Ram Lala Sarb Darshan Sanskrit Uchch Vidyalaya Narghoghi, P.S. Sarairanjan, District- Samastipur. 3. Parshuram Sharma, son of Radha Krishna Rai, resident of village-Andhari, P.S. Sahar, District- Bhojpur. 4. Shiv Mangal Pathak, son of Sri Shidh Nath Pathak, resident of village- Andhari, P S.- Sahar, District- Bhojpur, at present petitioner no. 3 and 4 are Assistant Teachers in Sanskrit Uchch Vidyalaya, Andhari, P S.- Sahar, District- Bhojpur… Petitioners. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. The Secretary/Commissioner, Prathmik, Madhyamik and Adult Education, Govt. of Bihar, Patna Department of Education, Vikash Bhawan, Patna. 3. The Additional Secretary, Prathmik, Madhyamik and Adult Education, Government of Bihar, Patna Department of Education, Vikash Bhawan, Patna. 4. The Special Director, Secondary Education-in-Charge, Sanskrit Education, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 5. The Bihar Sanskrit Shiksha Board, Patna Boring Canal Road, Patna through its Secretary. 6. The Chairman, Bihar Sanskrit Shiksha Board, Patna Boring Canal Road, Patna. 7. The Secretary, Bihar Sanskrit Shiksha Board, Patna, Boring Canal Road, Patna. 8. The District Education Officer, Samastipur. 9. The District Education Officer, Bhojpur. …. Respondents. ------------- 7. 11.08.2010 Counsel for the petitioners would submit that the following prayer of the petitioners in this writ petition; “1. That this is an application for issuance of an appropriate writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the order vide letter no. 1056 dated 21.12.1995 passed by 2 the respondent no. 2 issued under the signature of respondent no. 3 to the respondent no. 6 and 7 the items only to the petitioners schools by which the respondent no. 2 have cancelled the two posts of Prathmik Units to the each petitioner schools including 120 Prathmik units to the 60 schools from the date of take over ordinance dated 18.12.1989 and has also taken decision not to give grant to the two Prathmik Units to the each petitioners schools including 120 Prathmik Units to 60 Sanskrit Schools from 18.12.1989 the date of take over ordinance as contained in Annexure-8 and also for quashing the order passed by the respondent no. 2 vide letter no. 102 dated 29.1.1999 issued under the signature of the respondent no. 4 to the respondent nos. 6 and 7 items no. 24 and 15 only to the petitioners school as contained in Annexure-13 by which they have rejected the claim for payment of salary to the petitioners in Prathmik Units to the petitioners Schools including 120 in Prathmik Units in 41 Sanskrit Schools from the date of Ordinance dated 18.12.1989 the take over Ordinance No. 32/89 dated 18.12.1989 and further for issuance of an appropriate writ in the nature of mandamus for directing and commanding the respondents to make payment of all dues/salaries allowance and other service benefits as well as current salary allowance and other service benefit to the petitioners as Assistant Teacher in the Prathmik Units in the petitioners Schools from the date of their appointment/approval and sanctioned of the posts of Prathmik unit in the petitioners schools by the respondents State Government vide letter No. 957 dated 18.11.1989 i.e. from 18.11.1989 to uptill now and/or pass such other writ or writs order or orders direction or directions as Your Lordships may deem fit and proper in 3 the interest of justice.” is now squarely covered by an order dated 7.7.2006 in CWJC No. 11771 of 2000 whereby and whereunder the Chairman of the Board has been directed to consider the grievance of similarly situated persons. Counsel for the State has no instruction and in fact has not filed counter affidavit. The matter infact lies between the petitioner and the Board. However, in the counter affidavit of the Board, a plea has been taken it is government instruction and order which has led to impugned action and the order. In that view of the matter, though the order of this Court dated order dated 7.7.2006 in CWJC No. 11771 of 2000 would not amount to any effective adjudication on the issue raised by the petitioners but if the petitioners are themselves satisfied with only such consideration of their case by the Chairman of the Board this court would dispose of this case on the same terms and conditions as mentioned in the order dated 7.7.2006 in CWJC No. 11771 of 2000, the operative portion whereof reads as follows: “…..In view of the aforesaid discussions the impugned order contained in 4 Annexure-13, in so far as it relates to the petitioners, is quashed and the matter is remitted back to the Chairman of the Bihar Sanskrit Shiksha Board for taking a fresh decision in respect of claims of the petitioners in the matter of grant of approval to their appointments/services against 120 primary units sanctioned on 18-11-1989. Such units shall be treated to have remained sanctioned till 22.12.95.For the purpose of placing their points and materials, petitioners must approach the Chairman of the Sanskrit Shiksha Board along with a copy of this order within six weeks. Thereafter a decision in accordance with law should be taken at an early date, preferably within two months. Claims of the petitioners for payment of grants shall abide such decision of the Chairman and in case petitioners are found entitled for payment it should be made to them without any delay.” This Court, however, must clarify that the Chairman of the Board will not be entitled to reject the representation of the petitioner on the ground that he is bound by the government order and if that be the case of the Chairman of the Board and he would find himself unable in ultimately deciding the claim of the petitioners, it would be open for him to refer the matter to the State Government with his recommendation so that a final decision is taken by the State Government in accordance with law. Such exercise by the Chairman of the Board must be completed within a period of six months from 5 the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order and also by the State Government, if needed, in next three months. With the aforementioned observation and direction, this writ petition is disposed of. kanchan/ (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)