IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.14473 of 2006 1. Bhim Prasad Kapri, son of Sri Prasadi Kapri, resident of village – Mala Tikar, P.S. – Panjwara, District – Banka 2. Sashi Bhushan Jha, Son of Late Krishnadeo Jha, resident of Village – Gorgama, P.S. – Tarapur, District – Munger 3. Ratnesh Kumar, son of Late Jay Prakash Singh, resident of Village – Maheshpur, P.S. – Tarapur, District – Munger 4. Jai Prakash Yadav, son of Late Ramdhani Prasad Yadav, resident of village – Chhoti Manjhgain, P.S. – Haveli Kharagpur, District – Munger 5. Ganesh Roy, son of Late Sukhraj Roy, resident of village – Kharwa, P.S. – Belhar, District – Banka ………………… Petitioners Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. Commissioner and Secretary, Water Resources Department, Government of Bihar, Patna 3. Deputy Secretary, Revenue Administration, Water Resources Department, Government of Bihar, Patna 4. Chief Engineer, Water Resources Department, Bhagalpur 5. Executive Engineer, Irrigation Division, Tarapur, District - Munger 6. Executive Engineer, Irrigation Division, Bijji Kharwa, District – Banka ……………….. Respondents ---------------------------------- For the Petitioners: Mr. S. C. Jha - 3, Advocate For the State: Mr. Suresh Kumar Yadav, AC to G.P.-4 **************** 02. 02.12.2011 I. A. No. 4170 of 2011 has been filed for substitution of the names of legal heirs of Petitioner No. 2, who died on 20.10.2010. Names of legal heirs have been indicated in paragraph 2 of the Interlocutory Application. Interlocutory Application is allowed. Let legal heirs be substituted in place of Petitioner No. 2. Writ has been filed by these petitioners for a direction upon the respondents to make full payment of their salary for the period 27.04.1985 to 16.02.1996. This is the period when the petitioners stood terminated till they came 2 to be reinstated on the orders and direction of a Division Bench of this Court, contained in Annexure – 1. Contention of the counsel is that after reinstatement, they made a claim for payment of salary for the period of their dismissal till reinstatement, which was denied. But when Alakh Niranjan Prasad and similar other persons moved this Court in C.W.J.C. No. 7230 of 1998 a learned Single Judge vide His Order dated 27.10.1999, gave a direction for payment of salary, since the order of termination was held to be bad and illegal and the same was carried out. Grievance of the petitioners is that similarly situated persons can not be treated dissimilar and relief cannot be granted to some and refused to others. Claim of these petitioners have not been accepted or entertained and, therefore, they are before this Court, seeking similar relief as Alakh Niranjan Prasad as well as some other petitioners in whose case, similar Orders have been passed, which is C.W.J.C. No. 1980 of 2007, case of Mohan Lal Sah and Others as well as C.W.J.C. No. 9333 of 2006 as well as C.W.J.C. No. 3917 of 2005. Since in all these cases, the petitioners have been granted relief with a direction for payment for the period they stood terminated till their reinstatement, there is no reason why these petitioners would also not beget the same relief. 3 Writ is allowed with a direction upon the respondents that they must ensure payment of salary for the period in question within a shortest possible time, after making necessary allocation available in this regard. SKM (Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J.)