IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.10726 of 2005 Shankranand Poddar, son of late Raghuni Poddar, resident of Gulab Bag Tola, Gandhi Nagar, P.S.-Sadar Purnea, District- Purnea. ……..Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. Secretary, Rural Development Department, New Secretariat, Bihar, Patna(Vikash Bhawan) 3. Director, Panchayati Raj Directorate, Bihar, Patna 4. District Magistrate, Saharsa 5. District Magistrate, Madhepura 6. Deputy Development Commissioner-cum-Chief Executive Officer, District Board, Saharsa 7. Deputy Development Commissioner-cum-Chief Executive Officer, District Board, Madhepura. ……….Respondents ---------------------------------- 03. 18.08.2011 Heard learned counsels for the petitioner, Zila Parishad, Saharsa and Zila Parishad, Madhepura. Petitioner has claimed his salary from January, 1999 to December, 2001, September, 2002 to December, 2003 and July, 2004 to July, 2005. Initially the petitioner was posted in Singeshwar Block of Madhepura District on the post of Tax Daroga and regularly received the salary. On 03.08.1999 the petitioner was transferred from Singeshwar Block to Madhepura Zila Parishad because the authority concerned arrived at a conclusion that there was no sanctioned post of Tax Daroga at Singeshwar Block. On 19.12.2001 the petitioner was transferred from Madhepura District Board to Saharsa District Board, pursuant to which the petitioner joined Saharsa District Board on 21.12.2001 and since then he has been working. Counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondent Nos. 2 and 3, in which stand has been taken that D.D.C. cum Executive Officer of the Zila Parishad, Madhepura has been directed to make payment of salary of their staffs. The specific directions were issued to Zila Parishad, Madhepura and Zila Parishad, Saharsa vide various letters contained in Annexure-B series. Counter affidavit of Zila Parishad, Saharsa reflects that they were responsible for the payment from April, 2004 to June, 2005 but in the counter affidavit no denial has been made that petitioner joined Saharsa Zila Parishad on 21.12.2001 rather the same has been accepted in para 9 of the counter affidavit. In para 12 of the counter affidavit, it has been admitted that the D.D.C.-cum-Chief Executive Officer, Saharsa, on 04.02.2005 requested Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Madhepura for making the payment of due salary of the petitioner. In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the Zila Parishad, Madhepura the stand has been taken that though Madhepura District was carved out from Zila Parishad Saharsa in 1982 but no post of Tax Daroga was sanctioned at the Zila Parishad, Madhepura and the Rural Development Department vide order dated 16.11.2001 as contained in Annexure- A to the counter affidavit, directed all Zila Parishad to return the services of those employees who were working on the un-sanctioned post and in pursuance to that the Madhepura Zila Parishad returned the service of the petitioner to Zila Parishad, Saharsa vide Memo No. 528 dated 19.12.2001. Annexure-3 is the letter of the Secretary, Rural Development Department, Government of Bihar dated 17.09.2003 directing the D.D.C.-cum-Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Saharsa for making payment of the petitioner. Annexure-4 is the letter of the D.D.C.-cum-Chief Executive Officer, Saharsa addressed to the D.D.C.-cum-Chief Executive Officer, Madhepura, whereby request was made to make payment from January, 1999 to October, 2001. Considering the rival contentions of the parties, this is not in dispute that the petitioner worked from 03.08.1999 to 20.12.2001 at Zila Parishad, Madhepura and from 21.12.2001 at Zila Parishad, Saharsa. Hence the Zila Parishad, Madhepura is obliged to make payments from January, 1999 to 20th of December, 2001 and the Zila Parishad Saharsa is obliged to make payments from 21st of December, 2001 to 31st of December, 2001, from September, 2002 to December, 2003 and July, 2004 to July, 2005. Counsels for both the Zila Parishad undertake to make the aforesaid payment within a period of four months of receipt of the order of this Court. With the observations made above, the application stands allowed. Shageer (Dinesh Kumar Singh, J)