IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.15916 of 2010 1. MURARI S/O SATYA NARAYAN PRASAD SINGH R/O VILL KAITHWARI, P.S. & DISTT-SHAIKUPURA, AT PRESENT WORKING AS AN ASSISTANT TEACHER MIDDLE SCHOOL, SIRARI, ANCHAL-SHEIKHPURA, P.S. +DISTT-SHEIKHPURA 2. RAGHUBIR THAKUR S/O LATE KAMEHSWAR THAKUR R/O VILL +P.O.MALDAH, P.S.BARBIGHA, DISTT-SHIKHPURA, AT PRESENT WORKING AS AN ASSISTANT TEACHER IN MIDDLE SCHOOL, MALDAH, P.S.BARBIGHA, DISTT-SHEIKHPURA 3. KRISHANAMURARI PD. S/O LATE GANAURI PRASAD R/O VILL MADHEPUR, P.O.BELAO, P.S. BARBIGHA, DISTT-SHEIKHPURA, AT PRESENT WORKING AS AN ASSISTANT TEACHER IN MIDDLE SCHOOL, MALDAH, P.S.BARBIGHA, DISTT- SHEIKHPURA 4. AMOD SINGH S/O TRIPIT NARAYAN SHARMA R/O VILL +P.O.PAIN, P.S.+DISTT-SHEIKHPURA, AT PRESENT WORKING AS AN ASSISTANT TEACHER IN UPGRADED MIDDE SCHOOL NARSING PUR, P.S. BARBIGHA, DISTT- SHEIKHPURA Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE PRINICIPAL SECRETARY, HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA 3. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, FINANCE DEPARTMENT GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA 4. THE DEPUTY SECRETARY, FINANCE (PAY FIXATION) DEPARTMENT GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA 5. THE DIRECTOR, PRIMARY EDUCATION BIHAR, PATNA 6. THE REGIONAL, PRIMARY EDUCATION BIHAR, PATNA 7. THE DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF EDUCATION null SHEIKHPURA 8. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE SHEIKHPURA 9. THE DEPUTY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSIONER CUM- CHAIRMAN, DISTRICT EDUCATION ESTABLISHMENT COMMITTEE SHEIKHPURA 10. THE DISTRICT TRESSURY OFFICER MUNGER 11. THE DISTRICT ACCOUNT OFFICER MUNGER - 2 - ----------- 3 12/05/2011 The claim of the petitioners is that their cases are covered by the ratio and the decision which has been rendered by the High Court in the case of Shiv Kant Jha Vs. State of Bihar and others, C.W.J.C. No. 8333 of 1999 decided on 29.07.2004, contained in annexure-6. Based on the aforesaid decision the petitioners have approached the District Superintendent of Education, Sheikhpura for revision of their pay with effect from 1.1.1986 but no decision has been taken by the District Superintendent of Education for many a years. Since the representations do not have the dates nor is there evidence to show that they were actually forwarded to the District Superintendent of Education, the Court is not willing to go by the assertion made in the writ application in this regard. However, if the petitioners move the District Superintendent of Education, Sheikhpura now with a copy of the order of this Court passed today as well as the earlier order passed by the High Court contained in annexure-6, the District Superintendent of Education will - 3 - take appropriate decision if the cases of the petitioners are covered by annexure-6. This writ application is disposed of with the liberty aforesaid. AMIN/ (Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J.)