Sudhir Kumar vs The State Of Bihar and Ors
- Court
- Patna High Court
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1092 of 2016
CNR No. BRHC010444612015
======================================================
Sudhir Kumar Son of Sri Dinesh Sharan Verma Resident of Village - Patepur
Gopinath, Post Office - Digha, Police Station - Pusa, Dist.-Samastipur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State Of Bihar and Ors
2. The Principal Secretary, Fianance Department, Old Secretariat, Patna
3. The Rajendra Agriculturl University, Bihar, Pusa, Samastipur, through its
Registrar having office a
4. The Vica Chancellor, Rajendra Agricultural University, Pusa, Samastipur
5. The Director Administration, Rajendra Agricultural University, Pusa,
Samastipur
6. The Comptroller Rajendra Agricultural University, Bihar, Pusa, Samastipur
7. The Associate Deen-cum-Principal College of Fisheries Dholi, Muzaffarpur
8. The Vice chancellor Bihar Agricultural University, Sabour, Bhagalpur
9. The Director Administration, Bihar Agricultural University, Sabour,
Bhagalpur
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Gajendra Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Vijay Shankar Upadhyay, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. G. ANUPAMA CHAKRAVARTHY
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 03-11-2026
1. The Writ petition has been filed for the
following reliefs:
(i) Issuance of appropriate writ
in the nature of MANDAMUS,
commanding/directing the Respondents
to grant the pay scale of Rs. 5500-9000
with effect from 1.1.1996 and revised
pay scale of Rs 9300 to 34,800 Grade
Pay Rs 4600 to the petitioner which is
working as clerk in the College of
Fisheries under the Respondents/
University.
(ii) Issuance of appropriate writ
in the nature of mandamus,
commanding/ directing the
Patna High Court CWJC No.1092 of 2016 dt.03-11-2026
2/4
Respondents to grant the pay scale
equivocation to pay scale of Assistant
working in the Head quarter of the
Respondent/University especially when
the petitioner is similar than. doing the
work equivalent and
(iii) Any other relief or reliefs to
which the petitioner may be deemed
entitled under the law in the facts and
circumstances of the case.
2. The Learned counsel for the petitioner
has relied upon the judgment passed by the
Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in L.P.A. No.
766 of 2016 along with analogous L.P.As., which
were allowed on 24.01.2023.
3. The operative portion of the judgment
passed in L.P.A. No. 766 of 2016 reads as follows:
6. Claiming any pay parity
with similarly situated persons there
are number of events were required
to be taken note of like date of
joining, for which post and other
service conditions insofar as the post
held by respective parties. On the
last occasion we have taken note of
Apex Court decisions like The Union
of India and Ors. Vs. Rajib Khan
and Ors., P.U. Joshi and Ors. Vs.
Accountant General, Ahemdabad
and Union of India and Ors. Vs.
Pushpa Rani and ors. Today,
learned counsel for the State cited
S.C. Chandra and Ors. Vs. State
of Jharkhand and Ors. (2007) 8
Patna High Court CWJC No.1092 of 2016 dt.03-11-2026
3/4
SCC 279 (Para 27).
7. Reading of aforesaid
judgments of the Apex Court, it is
crystal clear that fixation of pay and
other service conditions including
upgradation of pay-scale is a policy
decision. In the present case,
petitioner State has taken a decision
and passed a resolution that
upgradation of pay-scale is extended
to Clerks and Head-clerks. There is
no resolution or decision of the State
to extend upgradation of pay-scale
in so far as Steno-Typist is
concerned. Therefore, the
respondents have no statutory right
to claim upgradation of pay-scale on
par with such of those Clerks or
Head-clerks, since they form
separate class of persons and a class
discrimination is permissible under
Article 14 of the Constitution.
Therefore, the petitioner State has
made out a prima-facie case so as to
interfere with the order of the
learned single judge dated
07.04.2015 passed in C.J.W.C. No.
15661 of 2014 and it is set aside. If
any of the respondents are holding
of the posts of clerk or Head Clerk, in
that event concerned respondent is
hereby directed to extend the
aforementioned policy of
upgradation of pay-scale.
8. Hence, the L.P.As stand
allowed.
4. Heard the Learned counsel for the
petitioner as well as the Learned counsel for the
respondents.
Patna High Court CWJC No.1092 of 2016 dt.03-11-2026
4/4
5. This Court finds that the petitioner is
working as a Clerk, which comes under the
category of Clerks and Head Clerks. The judgments
of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the cases of The
Union of India and Ors. Vs. Rajib Khan and
Ors., P.U. Joshi and Ors. Vs. Accountant
General, Ahmedabad and Union of India and
Ors. Vs. Pushpa Rani and Ors. are squarely
applicable to the present case. It is further evident
that the State has already taken a policy decision
and passed a resolution extending the benefit of
upgradation of pay scale to Clerks and Head
Clerks, and as the petitioner is working as a Clerk,
the same benefit has to be extended to him.
6. In view of the aforesaid discussion, the
present Writ petition is allowed in similar terms of
the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Division
Bench of this Court in L.P.A. No. 766 of 2016.
(G. Anupama Chakravarthy, J)
A mandeep /-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE N/A
Uploading Date 03.11.2026
Transmission Date