IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.3232 of 2008 Daya Nand Prakash, S/o Sri Ram Narayan Roy, resident of village Hasanpur Surat, P.O. + P.S. Patory, District Samastipur at present working as Clerk Bharati Arya High School, Jamalpur, Munger……………………………………….……Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Bihar through Chief Secretary- cum-Commissioner, Higher Education, Bihar, Patna. 2. Director, Secondary Education, Bihar, Patna 3. District Education Officer, Munger. 4. Kumar Arun Incharge Headmaster, Bharati Arya High School, Jamalpur, Munger……….Respondents ----------- 4 15.11.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned counsel for the State. Petitioner has filed this writ application challenging the letter dated 27.10.2007 (Annexure-1) issued by the District Education Officer, Munger addressed to the Incharge Headmaster of Bharti Arya High School, Jamalpur, Munger directing him to stop payment of salary of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the school in question is a minority school. Therefore, if the appointment of petitioner is valid and he is qualified, the respondent has no authority to stop his salary. He submits that earlier certificate of petitioner was sent for verification and the Secretary, Bihar School Examination Board, through his letter no.2019 dated 28.10.2004, 2 had reported the certificate of the petitioner as valid. But, in spite of the same, the respondents have not directed for release of his salary. In this context, learned counsel for the petitioner refers to letter of the Department dated 10.01.1986 annexed as Annexure-18 with I.A.No.1362 of 2008. This letter shows that in respect of linguistic and religious minority institutions, it was clarified in paragraph 6 that in case of non-teaching employees, there is no provision for approval of their services and if the Managing Committee had appointed any incumbent against sanctioned post, the same has to be accepted and payment has to be released. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that appointment of the petitioner was valid having been made after due advertisement and selection process and the petitioner was qualified for the post. Therefore, it was not open to the respondents to issue any order for stopping of payment of salary. The writ application was filed on 13.02.2008. However, till today, no counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondents. 3 In the circumstances, learned counsel for the petitioner prays that the matter may be remitted back to the Regional Deputy Director of Education, Munger to examine the matter, verify from the records with regard to validity of appointment of the petitioner and his certificate and, if he finds the same in order, he may be directed to pass specific orders for release of salary of the petitioner. Since no counter affidavit has been filed in this case, the writ application is disposed of with a direction to the Regional Deputy Director of Education, Munger to examine the case of the petitioner, check up validity of his appointment and his qualification and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. In case he has reasons to doubt either of the same, he shall notice to the petitioner to appear before him and produce all relevant materials in support of his claim. Thereafter he shall pass a reasoned order in the matter preferably within a period of two months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. BT (J. N. Singh, J.)