IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.18520 of 2009 DINESH KUMAR SINGH S/O RAM SURESH SINGH R/O VILLAGE RATANPUR, P.S. TOWN (BEGUSARAI), DISTT.- BEGUSARAI Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA 2. THE DIRECTOR, SECONDARY EDUCATION BIHAR, BUDDHA MARG, PATNA 3. THE DISTRICT EDUCATION OFFICER BEGUSARAI AT BEGUSARAI 4. THE HEAD MASTER, GOVT. SRI LAXMI NARAIN UDIT HIGH SCHOOL SHAKARPUR, P.S.- BAKHRI, DISTT. BEGUSARAI ----------- 2/ 27.04.2010 Heard counsel for the petitioner and the counsel appearing for the State. Petitioner claims to be appointed on the post of Clerk, vide order contained in Memo No. 355 dated 12.05.1992 issued under the signature of Director, Secondary Education- cum-Joint Secretary, Bihar, Patna. This was a temporary appointment. Petitioner’s case is that in compliance of this appointment letter, he gave his joining at Government High School Sakarpura, District- Begusarai. From the date of joining till October, 1992 he was paid his salary but, thereafter, the payment of salary was stopped by the Headmaster as he has doubts regarding the genuineness of the appointment of the petitioner. The Headmaster made a query from District Education Officer, Begusarai, and he affirmed the appointment of the petitioner. Despite, the fact that payment of salary was not resumed to the petitioner. He was not allowed to discharge his duties. The petitioner claims parity with Subodh Kumar Singh and others. 2 Counsel for the petitioner submits that vide letter contained in Memo No. 1285 dated 19th November, 1992, the Director, Secondary Education confirmed this fact that the appointment letter has been issued from the office of then Director, Secondary Education-cum-Joint Secretary, Sri A.K. Srivastava, for appointing the petitioner as Clerk and he was posted as Clerk. However, the payment of salary was not resumed to the petitioner. He was not allowed to discharge his duties. The counsel for the petitioner submits that since the case of the petitioner is identical to Subodh Kumar Singh and other similarly situated persons, as such, he is entitled for similar relief. The distinguished features of the petitioner’s case from the case of Subodh Kumar Singh and others is that they have approached the High Court by filing writ application and in their favour an order was passed, to allow to gave joining at the place of posting and payment of salary to the petitioner. So far the petitioner is concerned, since November, 1992, he has not been paid a single paisa as salary and not allowed to discharge his duties. In the fact and circumstance, no direction can be issued in his favour. However. The petitioner has liberty to approach Director, Secondary Education-Cum-Joint Secretary, Bihar, under rule signature, the petitioner claims that appointment letter was issued and subsequently, approval was given to his appointment in case, petitioner represents the 3 respondent No. 2, will consider and dispose it of, preferably within eight weeks. Sanjeet/- (Mridula Mishra, J.)