IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.10893 of 2005 RADHA MOHAN PD.THAKUR, son of Anandi Prasad Thakur, resident of village Bishunpur Sumer, P. S. Kanti, District-Muzaffapur… Petitioner. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR, through its Commissioner-cum- Secretary, Water Resource Department, Sichai Bhawan, Patna. 2. The Chief Engineer, Water Resource Department, Muzaffapur. 3. The Superintending Engineer, Design Planning Circle, Muzaffapur. … Respondents. ----------- 2. 14.01.2010 No one appears for the petitioner. Counsel for the State is present. In this writ application, the petitioner has prayed for following reliefs:- “1. That this is an application for the issuance of writ in the nature of certiorari or any other writ or writs for the quashing of order dated 23.6.2005 passed by respondent no. 2 (Chief Engineer, Water Resources Department, Muzaffapur) vide memo no. 1903 as contained in Annexure-3 to deduct the pecuniary benefits given to this petitioner on account of his promotion on the post of Head Clerk on 15.12.1988 retrospectively 3.11.1980 and also further directed to put the petitioner in Lower Pay Scale i.e. 5000-8000 to 4000-6000 in contravention of earlier order of this Hon’ble Court passed in C.W.J.C. No. 7772 of 2004 and Finance Department Memo No. 2334 dated 9.5.2005.” From the records it appears that 2 this court in an earlier writ application filed by the petitioner, CWJC No. 7772 of 2004 had the occasion to consider the prayer for grant of pay-scale of Rs.4500-7000 when his such claim was earlier rejected by the State Government and the consequential order was assailed in the aforementioned writ application. In that case it was held by this court in its order dated 29.3.2005 (Annexure- 1) that the impugned order refusing the petitioner the pay-scale of Rs.4500-7000 was bad and the same was quashed with a consequential direction for paying pack the amount recovered, if any, from the petitioner. The operative portion of the earlier order of this Court reads as follows:- “In view of the aforesaid fact itself the order dated 31.3.2004, as contained in Annexure-1, is quashed. Any recovery, which has been made, is required to be made good to the petitioner. However, it is directed that the authority, if so advised, can proceed and pass a general order with regard to all such employees in view of new gradation list, which has been published. The passing of the order would also not 3 preclude the petitioner, if so advised, to challenge the aforesaid gradation list before the appropriate forum/court.” From the counter affidavit filed in this case, it would appear that the said order of this court was complied by the State Government which had passed the order vide letter No. 1315 dated 26.5.2005 holding therein that the petitioner had already been given the required pay revision and A.C.P. and his case was not comparable with the employees working in the State of Jharkhand. The impugned order in this writ application dated 23.6.2005 is only the consequential order of the aforementioned order contained in Annexure- A to the counter affidavit. In the counter affidavit it has also been clarified that the petitioner who was earlier appointed as an Assistant against the leave vacancy only for the period of leave of one Sri Pramatma Nand Srivastava by an order dated 5.8.1970. He was promoted on the post of Head Clerk by an order dated 15.12.1988 w.e.f. 3.11.1980. The respondents, therefore, have explained that the pay-scale 4 of the working Head Clerk was re-determined by order dated 26.9.2005 and the first ACP scale was enhanced from 4500-8000 to 5000- 8000. It is claimed by respondents that the petitioner’s seniority as per his date of substantive appointment on the post of head clerk has also been fixed and consequently it has been found that the petitioner was not entitled for anything beyond what he had already been given. The petitioner has not filed any reply to the said counter-affidavit and consequently it has to be held that the order of this court has been complied and consequential order dated 26.9.2005 (Annexure-B) which has not been even assailed in this writ application suffers from no infirmity. That being so, this writ application is devoid of any merit and is hereby dismissed. kanchan (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)