IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LPA No.682 of 2007 1. The State of Bihar through the Secretary to the Government, Department of Finance, Government of Bihar, Patna 2. The Special Secretary to the Government, Department of Finance, Government of Bihar, Patna 3. The Additional Commissioner (Institution), Finance Department, Government of Bihar, Patna 4. The Secretary, Department of Human Resources (Secondary Education) Government of Bihar, Patna 5. The Commissioner, Secondary Education, Government of Bihar, Patna 6. The Director, Secondary Education, Government of Bihar, Patna 7. The Regional Deputy Director of Education, Purnia Division, Purnia 8. The District Education Officer, Katihar 9. The Treasury Officer, Katihar 10. The Headmaster of High School, Katihar 11. The Headmaster, Adarsh High School, Katihar 12. The Headmaster, Lakhaminarayan Sudhansu High School, Chandwa, Purnia 13. The Headmaster, Gandhi Uchcha Vidhyalaya, Katihar 14. The Headmaster, Uchcha Vidhyalaya Amdabad, Katihar .... Respondents/ Appellants VERSUS 1. Kharahan Sah, Son of Late Shaukhilal Sah, Resident of Village Nawabganj, Police Station Narpatganj, District Araria 2. Shubh Narayan Prasad ‘Kumud’, Son of Shri Nandipat Sah, Resident of Village & Police Station Paru, District Muzaffarpur 3. Krityanand Pathak son of Late Uchitlal Pathak, Resident of Village Dabhra, Police Station Tarwari, District Araria 4. Jyotindra Nath Jha, Son of Chchedilal Jha, Resident of Village Kukroon, Police Station Dhamdaha, District Purnia 5. Rajkishore Choudhary, Son of Late Prabhuchandra Chodhary, Resident of Village Jorawarganj, Police Station Israyan, Distirct Saharsa 6. Ghanshayam Jha, Son of Shri Chandra Bhushan Jha, Resident of Village- Rajpura, Police Station Bhawanipur, District Purnia .... Petitioners/Respondents 2 8 5.3.2009 Head the parties and perused the judgment of the Supreme Court dated 16.12.2008 passed in Civil Appeal Nos.3351-3354 of 2003. The Supreme Court has taken similar view as the one taken by the Writ Court in the judgment and order under appeal. The Supreme Court has also held that the amended provisions of FR 22-C would apply to the concerned teachers but has further directed that no recovery of the excess amount paid to the teachers of the secondary school shall be made and if any recovery has been made then the same should be refunded. We dispose of this appeal in terms of the aforesaid judgment of the Supreme Court with similar directions. (Shiva Kirti Singh, J.) (Sheema Ali Khan, J.) sk