IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.W.J.C. No. 8727 of 2009 1. Dinanath Sharma, son of late Ram Govind Sharma, resident of village Netawar, P.O. Belawan, Police Station Darauli, District Siwan, at present posted and working as an Assistant Teacher in Govt. Primary School, Lebhari, Anchal Mairwa, District Siwan 2. Hari Shankar Ram, son of late Sital Ram, resident of village Mathia, P.O. Sahpur, Police Station Nautan, District Siwan, retired while working as a (Head Teacher) Assistant Teacher in Govt. Primary School, Sahpur Mishrawali, Anchal Mairwa-I, District –Siwan .. Petitioners Versus 1. The State of Bihar 2. The District Magistrate, Siwan 3. The District Education Establishment Committee, Siwan, through the Deputy Development Commissioner, Siwan, it’s Chairman 4. The District Superintendent of Education, Siwan .. Respondents **** /3/ 05.08.2009 Heard the counsel for the petitioners and the State. 2. Petitioners have filed this application for quashing the part of the order, contained in Memo No. 2456, dated 25.08.1995, and for a direction to the respondents for payment of difference of arrears of salary of I.Sc. trained pay scale with effect from the retrospective date since when they have been allowed promotion in the I.Sc. trained scale, i.e., 01.04.1985. By the impugned order, contained in Memo No. 2456, dated 24.08.1995, petitioners and similarly situated teachers were allowed I.Sc. trained scale with a retrospective 2 date, but, payment of the promotional scale was allowed to them with the date of issuance of the order. Counsel for the petitioners submits that the part of the impugned order which is under challenge in this case has already been considered by this Court in several writ applications filed by the similarly situated persons. The orders have been annexed as Annexures 3 and 6. Petitioners in those writ applications also aggrieved by order, dated 24.08.1995, challenged the part of the order due to which they had wrongly been deprived of monetary benefit of promotion of I.Sc. trained scale with effect from the date the promotion was allowed to them. Part of the impugned order which deprived the petitioners getting benefit of promotional scale from the date of issuance of the order was quashed. The matter was remitted back to the respondent authorities for making payment of arrears of salary in the promotional scale with effect from the date of information. The finding recorded by this Court in the earlier writ application (C.W.J.C. No. 10464 of 1999) is as follows : “The normal rule is, no doubt, represented by the aforesaid rules of Bihar Service Code and the Bihar Financial Rules and normally the employee can be paid salary of higher post only when he assumes 3 charge of that post. However, in case, the employee is not at fault and is prevented from assuming charge of promoted post due to circumstance, beyond his control or due to delay or laches on the part of the employer, in that event and particularly, in the event when retrospective promotion has to be granted to redress an earlier legal injury caused to an employee then the concerned employee is definitely not at fault and can not be punished by depriving him of monetary benefits. He must be compensated so as to keep him at par with others who got the benefits from due date.” 3. Similarly in C.W.J.C. No. 15325 of 2005 and analogous cases in similar matter this Court has held as follows : “Before parting with this case, it is relevant to observe here that many of the teachers are very often coming to this Court for claiming their relief as has already been granted to other teachers as per different orders passed by this Court. Therefore, it is expected of the concerned authorities that they 4 should examine the cases of all the persons, who are covered under the orders of promotion of either of the aforesaid two memos and if they find that they are also entitled for similar relief, they should consider and grant the same after examining each case without delay.” 4. I find that despite the direction of this Court the respondent authorities are compelling each and every teacher, who was allowed promotion in the I.Sc. trained scale with retrospective effect by the same memo, to come before this Court and obtain an order in their favour. Unless an order is passed by this Court in favour of an individual teacher, he is not being allowed the benefits arising out of the promotion granted to him in I.Sc. trained scale with retrospective effect. Direction of this Court is being ignored by the respondent authorities. Once the impugned order has been quashed deciding law, it is applicable in case of each and every similarly situated persons and without compelling individual teachers to come before this Court and get an order in their favour. Respondents should decide all similar cases by one order. Not complying the direction of this Court, amounts contempt of the order of this Court. 5 5. Part of the impugned order, contained in Memo No. 2456, dated 24.08.1995, whereby the promotional benefits were allowed to the petitioners though quashed earlier is again being quashed. The respondents are directed to make payment of arrears of salary of I.Sc. trained scale to the petitioners with effect from 01.04.1985, i.e., the date when they are allowed promotion in the I.Sc. trained scale. Payment of arrears of salary must be made within two months from the date of production/communication of this order. 6. With these observations and directions, this application is allowed. Cp:2/S.A. (Mridula Mishra, J.)