IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.12652 of 2003 Dr. Nitendra Prasad Sinha, S/o. late Shyamacharan Sinha, presently residing at Mohanpur Punaichak, P.S. Shastrinagar, Town and District - Patna- 800 023. ………Petitioner. Versus 1. The State of Bihar through the Commissioner-cum-Secretary, Medical Education and Family Welfare, Department of Health, Government of Bihar, Vikas Bhawan, Secretariate, Bailey Road, Patna. 2. The Director-in-Chief, Medical Education & Family Welfare, Department of Health, Government of Bihar, Vikas Bhawan, Secretariate, Bailey Road, Patna. 3. The Principal, Patna Dental College & Hospital, Bankipore, Patna – 800 004. 4. The Accountant General, Bihar, Virchand Patel Path, Patna. …………….Respondents For the Petitioner: - Mr. Subhash Prasad Singh, Advocate. For the State : - Mr. Nirmal Kumar Sinha, J.C. to AAG-2. ----------- 6/ 11.11.2008 The petitioner superannuated as a Tutor in Dentistry from the Patna Dental College. He filed this writ application for various retiral dues. His contention was that he was entitled to time bound promotion and revised pay scale with effect from 01.01.1996 which was not given to him. He claimed parity with one Dr. Chitranjan Prasad, claiming the pay scale as given to him. State has filed counter affidavit in which it is stated that the petitioner has since been given the second time bound promotion. The case of the State is that there is no parity - 2 - between Dr. Chitranjan Prasad and the petitioner inasmuch as Dr. Chitranjan Prasad belongs to teaching cadre whereas the petitioner belongs to service cadre and was teaching in the last four years of his career. Petitioner did not even have a post-graduate degree and as such was superannuated merely as a Tutor. He could not have been promoted to lecturer whereas Dr. Chitranjan Prasad had been in the teaching cadre for last 26 years and was Professor and as such was receiving his remuneration in the pay scale of Professor. Having heard the parties, in my view, so far as the promotion is concerned, the petitioner has been granted the relief as prayed for. But so far as pay parity with Dr. Chitranjan Prasad is concerned, State is correct that relief cannot be claimed by the petitioner. Admittedly, petitioner belongs to Bihar Dental Services Cadre which is non- teaching cadre which has no promotional hierarchy, whereas Dr. Chitranjan Prasad joined as a Tutor in the Dental College and is in the teaching cadre. Petitioner joined as Tutor in 1995 and superannuated in the year 1999. Petitioner not being a post-graduate could not even be - 3 - promoted to lecturer much less Professor. Even if he was in teaching cadre, he has received two revisions of pay scale. In view of the facts aforesaid, petitioner, in my view, cannot claim parity with Dr. Chitranjan Prasad who has since become Professor and draws the pay scale of Professor under the teaching cadre that being so. The petitioner is not entitled to any further relief except what is admissible under the 5th Pay Revision Commission or the replacement scale specified therein in respect of non- teaching cadre. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that revised P.P.O. has not been issued even though State in its counter affidavit has admitted liability to pay the revised pay scale. Let the State do the same within a period of one month from today with due intimation to the Accountant General clearing all arrears and account thereof. With these observations, this writ petition is disposed of. Sanjeet (Navaniti Prasad Singh, J.)