Mahesh Prasad vs The T.M. Bhagalpur University and Ors
- Court
- Patna High Court
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.620 of 2019
In
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.19617 of 2013
CNR No. BRHC010157942019
======================================================
Mahesh Prasad S/o Late Teja Ram Resident Of Nayachak Road, P.O. and P.S.-
Ishakchak, District- Bhagalpur- 612001 Bihar
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The T.M. Bhagalpur University and Ors through its Registrar namely
Col.Arun Kumar Singh
2. The Vice Chancellor T.M Bhagalpur University ,Bhagalpur T.M Bhagalpur
University ,Bhagalpur namely Dr.L.C.Saha
3. The Principal S.M College Bhagalpur namely Dr.L.C .Saha Bhagalpur Bihar
4. The Financial Advisor ,T.M Bhagalpur University Bhagalpur University
,Md.Gulam Moiuddin
5. The Finance Officer T.M.Bhagalpur University, Bhagalpur
6. The State of Bihar Through the Principal Secretary ,Education Department
Government of Bihar New Secretariat Patna ,namely Mr.R.K.Mahajan IAS
7. The Director Department of Higher Education Govt. of Bihar Patna namely
Dr.Rekha Kumari
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Purushottam Kumar Jha, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Shashi Shekhar Tiwary (AAG-5)
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RITESH KUMAR
CAV JUDGMENT
Date : 04-11-2026
Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
2. The present contempt petition has been filed for
non-compliance of the order dated 17.09.2018 passed in CWJC
No.19617 of 2013, whereby the writ petition was disposed of
Patna High Court MJC No.620 of 2019 dt.04-11-2026
2/22
while recording that “after hearing dated 23.01.2002 it appears
that charges were framed against the petitioner, but due to non-
cooperation as alleged in the counter affidavit, the departmental
proceeding against the petitioner was not taken to logically end
and the petitioner superannuated w.e.f. 31.07.2011. Now the
petitioner has filed the present writ petition for a direction to the
respondents to grant pay scale of Rs.5200-9000/- in terms of the
Judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of
State of Bihar Vs. Sunny Prakash reported in (2013) 3 SCC
559 . In view of the superannuation of the petitioner without
concluding the departmental proceeding and in absence of any
relationship of master and servant, which has come to an end
upon superannuation of the petitioner, cannot proceed against
the petitioner in the departmental proceeding. However, if the
rule regulating pension permits any action for forfeiture of
pension, the respondents can only take action against the
petitioner, for forfeiture of the Pension, if the law so permits. It
was further observed that if there is no provision authorizing
action after superannuation under the University Statute, the
respondents have to grant all pensionary benefits to the
petitioner. So far, as claim of the petitioner for grant of pay scale
in terms of the Judgment of the Apex Court reported in the case
Patna High Court MJC No.620 of 2019 dt.04-11-2026
3/22
of Sunny Prakash (2013) 3 SCC 559, the respondents have to
grant pay scale admissible to the Office Assistant in the light of
the Judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Sunny Prakash
(Supra) and ensure payment thereto. The respondents have to
work out the entitlement of arrears of salary in light of the
Judgment in the case of Sunny Prakash (Supra), however, the
direction of the entitlement of payment of the petitioner cannot
come in the way of the respondents to take action for forfeiture
of pension, if law permits such action under the University Acts
and the Statute”.
3. It is the case of the petitioner that in compliance of
the order dated 17.09.2018, the petitioner submitted a detailed
representation before the Registrar, Tilka Manjhi Bhagalpur
University, Bhagalpur on 02.11.2018, whereby the petitioner
ventilated his grievances, in terms of the directions given by this
Hon’ble Court in C.W.J.C. No.19617 of 2013. When no action
was taken by the University, the petitioner was constrained to
file the present contempt petition.
4. The University filed its show cause, wherein it has
been stated that in compliance of the order dated 17.09.2018,
the University scrutinized the records appertaining to the case of
the petitioner and found that the pension of the petitioner has
Patna High Court MJC No.620 of 2019 dt.04-11-2026
4/22
been fixed at Rs.8715/- per month, along with other admissible
st
allowances, granting the benefits of 1 A.C.P on 01.02.2003
st
with a grade pay of Rs.2800/- and 1 M.A.C.P. on 01.02.2011
th
with a grade pay of Rs.4200/- in the 6 pay revision. The
th
pension of the petitioner has been further revised in the 7 pay
revision to the tune of Rs.22450/- per month, along with
admissible allowances. It has been stated that the entire
calculation of the pension of the petitioner has been done in the
pay scale of Rs.4000-6000/-, which is the pay scale for the post
of Office Assistant. It has further been stated by the University
in its show cause that as per the Sankalp No.841 dated
13.04.1991 issued by the Department of Human Resources and
Development, Government of Bihar, Patna, the pay scale of
non-teaching employees was revised w.e.f. 01.01.1986. The post
of Office Assistant, Shorter, Routine Clerk, Pharmacist,
Compounder, Technician, etc. falls into the same category and
their pay scale was revised to Rs.975-1540/-. Later on, vide
Sankalp No.1972 dated 12.10.2004 issued by the Department of
Human Resources and Development, Government of Bihar,
Patna, the entire Clerical post whose pay scale was Rs.975-
1540/- was categorized as Lower Division Clerk (L.D.C) and
their pay scale was revised to Rs.3050-4590/-, payable w.e.f.
Patna High Court MJC No.620 of 2019 dt.04-11-2026
5/22
01.01.1996. The Clerical post and the post of Assistant, whose
pay scale was Rs.1200-1800/- were categorized as Upper
Division Clerk (U.D.C.) and their pay scale was revised to
Rs.4000-6000/-, payable w.e.f. 01.01.1996. It has further been
stated by the University in its show cause that the petitioner has
been granted promotion to the post of Office Assistant and as on
01.01.1991 he was given the pay scale of Rs.1200-1800/-.
Further the post of Office Assistant was not specifically
mentioned in the Sankalp No.1972 dated 12.10.2004. The
Hon’ble Supreme Court of India vide its Judgment dated
18.01.2013 passed in the case of ( Sunny Prakash Vs The State
of Bihar) reported in 2013 (3) SCC 559, directed the State of
Bihar to implement the Judgment and order dated 07.08.2008
passed by the Hon’ble Patna High Court in C.W.J.C. No.10870
of 2008, whereby a direction was issued to the Chief Secretary,
Government of Bihar, Patna to ensure that the commitment
made by the State Government to the Bihar State University and
College Employees Federation is honoured and implemented.
As per the said Contempt the pay scale of Rs.4000-6000/- was
payable to the Library Assistant/Shorter/Routine Clerk and
Correspondence Clerk. The pay scale of Rs.5500-9000/- was
payable only to the Assistant of the College and the University.
Patna High Court MJC No.620 of 2019 dt.04-11-2026
6/22
By the said agreement the post of Storekeeper was agreed to be
treated as of Assistant and the pay scale applicable to the
Assistants were agreed to be paid to the Storekeepers. In the
said agreement there was no mention of the pay scale payable to
the Office Assistant. In compliance of the order dated
17.09.2018 passed by the Hon’ble Patna High court in C.W.J.C.
No.19617 of 2013 i.e. the order under contempt, the entire post
retiral dues, attached to the post of Office Assistant has already
been paid to the petitioner. The petitioner in his representation
has claimed that he has retired from the post of Assistant,
therefore his post-retirement dues are required to be granted in
the pay scale of Rs.5500-9000/-. In the show cause it has further
been stated that the post of Office Assistant is neither equivalent
to the post of Assistant, nor the petitioner possesses the
qualification attached to the post of Assistant. The post of Office
Assistant is equivalent to the post of Routine clerk, carrying
similar nature of work. The petitioner was never promoted to the
post of Assistant, therefore relying upon the notification issued
by the College, where he has been shown to be retired from the
post of Assistant, could not be a ground to get the pay scale of
Office Assistant. Otherwise also this Hon’ble court directed to
grant pay scale admissible to Office Assistant in the light of the
Patna High Court MJC No.620 of 2019 dt.04-11-2026
7/22
Judgment in the case of ( Sunny Prakash Vs. The State of
Bihar) reported in 2013 (3) SCC 559 and the same has been
granted to the petitioner.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner in to the
Show cause filed on behalf of the University submits that the
University calculated the pension of the petitioner on the basis
of the pay scale of Rs.4000-6000/- for the post of Office
Assistant. He submits that in view of the Judgment of the
Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of ( Sunny Prakash
Vs. The State of Bihar) reported in 2013 (3) SCC 559, the
Assistants working in the Constituent Colleges are entitled for
being paid their salary in the pay scale of Rs.5500-9000/- w.e.f.
01.01.1996 and in view of the order of the Hon’ble Supreme
Court of India in the case of Sunny Prakash (Supra), the stand
of the University justifying their action in grant of the pay scale
of Rs.4000-6000/- to the petitioner, instead of the pay scale of
Rs.5500-9000/- is thoroughly misconceived and unsustainable.
He submits that so far, the contention of the University to the
effect that the post of Office Assistant is not included in the
Sankalp of the State Government/the agreement entered into in
between the State Government and the Bihar State University
and College Employees Federation is concerned, the same is
Patna High Court MJC No.620 of 2019 dt.04-11-2026
8/22
thoroughly misconceived and unsustainable. He submits that an
Hon’ble Single Judge of this Court vide order dated 27.11.2024
passed in C.W.J.C. No.992 of 2020 and order dated 11.12.2024
passed in C.W.J.C. No.5454 of 2020 has been pleased to hold
that “it is also indicated that actually there is no difference
between an Assistant and the Lower Division Clerk working in
the Constituent College and the revised scale of pay decided by
the Statutory Pay Fixation Committee will get precedence over
the Pay Verification Cell”. He next submits that the stand taken
by the University that the post of Office Assistant is equivalent
to Routine Clerk is thoroughly unsustainable and misconceived
in the eyes of law. The stand of the University is an attempt to
mislead this Hon’ble Court.
6. Per contra the learned counsel appearing on behalf
of the University and the State submits that in compliance of the
orders passed by this Hon’ble Court, the petitioner has been
given all the post-retirement benefits, as per his entitlement.
They submit that the pension of the petitioner was revised after
grant of benefit, in terms of the directions given by this Hon’ble
Court on 17.09.2018 and the revised pension, which is being
regularly paid to the petitioner i.e. Rs.22450/- per month in the
th
7 pay revision, which has been fixed in the pay scale of
Patna High Court MJC No.620 of 2019 dt.04-11-2026
9/22
Rs.4000-6000/-, which is the pay scale prescribed for the Office
Assistant, in terms of the Sankalp dated 13.04.1991 and
12.08.2004. The petitioner was granted Promotion to the post of
Office Assistant on 01.01.1991 and he was given the pay scale
of Rs.1200-1800/-, in view of the Sankalp of the State
Government dated 12.10.2004. The University in terms of the
direction given by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the
case of Sunny Prakash (Supra) has granted the pay scale of
Rs.4000-6000/-, which was payable to the Library Assistant,
Shorter, Routine Clerk and the Correspondence Clerk, Since the
pay scale of Rs.5500-9000/- is payable only to the Assistants of
the Colleges and University as well as the Storekeeper,
therefore, the petitioner has been paid the pay scale of Rs.4000-
6000/-.
7. They next submit that in the agreement entered into
between the State of Bihar and the Bihar State University and
College Employees Federation, there was no mention of the post
of Office Assistant. The post of Office Assistant is neither
equivalent to the post of Assistant nor the petitioner possesses
the qualification, which is required for the post of Assistant. The
post of Office Assistant is equivalent to the post of Routine
Clerk, carrying similar nature of work and the petitioner was
Patna High Court MJC No.620 of 2019 dt.04-11-2026
10/22
never promoted to the post of Assistant. Reliance placed by the
petitioner on the office memo issued by the College, which
shows him to be retired from the post of Assistant, cannot be a
ground to get the pay scale of Assistant. They submit that the
Hon’ble Single Judge vide his order dated 17.09.2018 directed
for making payment of the pay scale admissible to the Office
Assistant, in view of the Judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme
Court of India in the case of Sunny Prakash (Supra) and the
same has already been granted by the University, therefore the
present contempt petition does not survive and the same is fit to
be dismissed.
8. Having considered the rival submissions and after
going through the records, it appears that vide order dated
08.05.2026, this Court after taking into account the submissions
made by the petitioner and the University directed the State of
Bihar to file a show cause, clarifying the position that whether
th
during 4 Pay revision vide Finance Department letter no.3734
dated 07.04.1977, the cadre of Assistant was merged i.e. LDC
and UDC. The benefit of merger was implemented in the
University vide letter no.91 dated 27.01.1982 w.e.f. 01.07.1981
and subsequently, the State Government vide Finance
Department letter no.8826 dated 20.12.2000, demerged/made
Patna High Court MJC No.620 of 2019 dt.04-11-2026
11/22
demerger of the cadre of Assistant back to LDC and UDC and it
was implemented by the State Government for its employees.
Whether any such demerger was notified for the employees of
the University or not and if not, whether it would be
automatically applicable to the employees of the University,
since the Assistant in the State Government and the University
are treated equally and this demerger was before coming into
force of the A.C.P Rules. This Court further directed the State
Government to file its show cause, taking into consideration the
orders passed by this Hon’ble Court dated 27.11.2024 passed in
C.W.J.C. No.992 of 2020, order dated 11.12.2024 passed in
C.W.J.C. No.5454 of 2020, order dated 18.10.2024 passed in
C.W.J.C. No.22953 of 2018 and order dated 13.04.2021 passed
in C.W.J.C. No.4722 of 2020.
9. In compliance of the order dated 08.05.2026 a
supplementary show cause was filed on behalf of the opposite
party nos.6 & 7. From perusal thereof, it transpires that the State
Government vide its letter contained in Memo no.1173 dated
05.10.1989 decided to merge the pay scale of Upper Division
Clerk and the Lower Division Clerk w.e.f. 01.07.1981. Vide
resolution contained in Memo no.841 dated 13.04.1991, the
State Government revised the pay scale of the officials and the
Patna High Court MJC No.620 of 2019 dt.04-11-2026
12/22
non-teaching employees of the University and Colleges in the
th
4 pay revision w.e.f. 01.01.1986. The Assistants were granted
the pay scale of Rs.1200-1800/-, whereas other Class-III
employees i.e. Office Assistant, Stenographer Grade-II, Routine
Clerk, Pharmacist, Compounder, Junior Division Assistants and
Technicians were granted the pay scale of Rs.975-1540/-. Again,
vide resolution no.8825 & 8826 dated 20.12.2000, the State
Government decided to demerge different posts of Clerk and
those appointed before 20.12.2000 were designated as Upper
Division Clerk. As per the said letter, the appointment made
after 20.12.2000 on different Clerical posts were designated as
Lower Division Clerk. Subsequently, the department of
Education, Government of Bihar vide its resolution no.1972
dated 12.10.2004 revised the pay scale of the employees of the
th
University and Colleges in the 5 pay revision w.e.f. 01.01.1996
and from perusal of Parishist (Gha) of the said resolution, it
would transpire that the principle of demerger was adopted in
the aforesaid resolution. The Lower Division Clerk have been
granted the pay-scale of Rs.3050-4590/-, whereas the Upper
Division Clerk have been granted the pay scale of Rs.4000-
6000/- w.e.f. 01.01.1996. Again, the pay scale of officials and
non-teaching employees of the University and Colleges were
Patna High Court MJC No.620 of 2019 dt.04-11-2026
13/22
revised vide resolution no.2693 dated 27.08.2010 and the same
has adopted and taken into consideration the letter no.8825 and
letter no. 8826 dated 20.12.2000 of the Finance Department,
which would be evident from Clause 30 (iv) of the resolution
dated 27.08.2010.
10. It further transpires from the said affidavit filed on
behalf of the Opposite party nos.6 and 7, that vide letter no.429
dated 04.03.2014 the Hon’ble Chancellor approved the Statutes
regarding the service conditions of the Class-III and IV
employees of the Universities and their Constituent
Units/Colleges. As per the said resolution the Cadre of non-
teaching employees of the University is separate from the
Constituent Colleges and the promotional avenues to higher post
are also not the same. In the said Statute also, reference
regarding demerger of Upper Division Clerk and the Lower
Division Clerk w.e.f. 20.12.2000 was also taken into
consideration and it has also been prescribed that the entry level
in the Clerical post will be LDC and the post of UDC will be a
promotional post, from the LDC. It has been stated that from the
facts stated above it is clear that the Education Department of
the State Government has adopted the letter no.8825 and 8826
dated 20.12.2000 with respect of the University employees and
Patna High Court MJC No.620 of 2019 dt.04-11-2026
14/22
accordingly, the Class-III employees appointed on different
posts i.e. Routine Clerk, Correspondence Clerk, Bill Clerk and
Office Assistant etc., prior to 20.12.2000 were designated as
UDC and after 20.12.2000 the appointment can only be made as
LDC and further, the post of UDC has been made a promotional
post, for the LDC. It has further been stated that there were
some discrepancies/anomalies in the pay scale of the non-
teaching employees of the University and on 16.07.2003 an
agreement/compromise was arrived at in between the Federation
and the State Government, regarding parity between the
employees of the Constituent colleges of the University and the
State Government. The said matter was the subject matter
before the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Sunny
Prakash (Supra) and the said agreement has been referred to in
the Judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in
paragraph no.6, wherein 50% Dearness Allowance was to be
merged with the basic pay, the medical allowances was to be
increased from Rs.50/- to Rs. 100/-, facility of ACP was to be
given to the employees, Head Assistant and Accountant of the
Colleges were to be designated as Section Officer at the
Departmental level, the pay scale of Rs.5500-9000/- was to be
granted to the Assistants of the Colleges and the University,
Patna High Court MJC No.620 of 2019 dt.04-11-2026
15/22
Assistant Librarian and the P.T.I., who were possessing
qualification fixed by the U.G.C., were to be granted the UGC
pay scale, Library Assistant, Shorter, Routine Clerk,
Correspondence Clerk were to be granted the pay scale of
Rs.4000-6000/- at the department level, facilities of
accumulation of 240 days E.L. and the encashment were to be
granted to the employees at par with the employees of the State
Government, which will be admissible similarly to the Class-III
and Class-IV employees, Ward Servant were to be designated as
Hostel Servant, anomalies regarding the pay scale of University
Engineer, Assistant Engineer, Junior Engineer and Electrician
was to be removed and the Storekeeper were to be treated as an
Assistant and the pay scale to be given accordingly. In view of
the Judgment passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in
the case of Sunny Prakash (supra) the State Government vide
its letter contained in memo no.1163 dated 20.06.2014 granted
pay scale of Rs.4000-6000/- w.e.f. 01.04.1997 to the Library
Assistant, Shorter, Routine Clerk and the Correspondence Clerk
of the Universities and its Constituent Colleges, who were
appointed in accordance with law and working against the
sanctioned and vacant post, having the requisite qualification for
the post. Similarly, vide letter no.1192 dated 23.06.2014 the pay
Patna High Court MJC No.620 of 2019 dt.04-11-2026
16/22
scale of Rs.5500-9000/- w.e.f. 01.04.1997 was granted to the
Assistants of the University and its Constituent Colleges, who
were appointed in accordance with law against the sanctioned
and vacant posts and who possessed the requisite qualification,
equivalent to the Secretariat Assistant at the time of
appointment. It has further been stated that in view of the fact
that the Routine Clerk/Correspondence Clerk appointed before
20.12.2000, are entitled for the pay scale of Rs.4000-6000/-,
whereas the Assistant is entitled for the pay scale of Rs.5500-
9000/- w.e.f. 01.01.1996. Since, admittedly the petitioner was
promoted as Office Assistant and not as an Assistant, therefore
he is entitled for the pay scale of Rs.4000-6000/- w.e.f.
01.01.1996. It has further been stated that the post of Office
Assistant is different from the post of Assistant. In the show
cause it has further been mentioned that so far, the order dated
27.11.2024 passed in C.W.J.C. No.992 of 2020, order dated
11.12.2024 passed in C.W.J.C. No.5454 of 2020, order dated
18.10.2024 passed in C.W.J.C. No.22953 of 2018 and order
dated 13.04.2021 passed in C.W.J.C. No.4722 of 2020 are
concerned, the State Government has preferred Letters Patent
Appeal bearing L.P.A. No.40 of 2026, against the order passed
in C.W.J.C. No. 992 of 2020, L.P.A. No.811 of 2025, against the
Patna High Court MJC No.620 of 2019 dt.04-11-2026
17/22
order passed in C.W.J.C. No.22953 of 2018 and L.P.A. No.86 of
2022, against the order passed in C.W.J.C. No.4722 of 2020.
11. When the matter was again heard on 03.07.2026,
this Court after taking into consideration the supplementary
show cause filed on behalf of the opposite party nos.6 and 7,
directed that from perusal of the supplementary show cause it
would transpire that the query/question formulated in paragraph
no.6 of the order dated 08.05.2026 have not been specifically
answered by the State opposite parties, inasmuch as that a
statement in paragraph no.13 has been made that the State
Government has adopted the letter no.8825 & 8826 dated
20.12.2000 of the Finance Department in respect of the
University employees and accordingly the Class-III employees
appointed on different posts i.e. Routine Clerk/Correspondence
Clerk/Bench Clerk/Office Assistant etc., prior to 20.12.2000
were designated as U.D.C. and after 20.12.2000 the
appointment can only be made as the L.D.C. and further the
post of U.D.C. is a promotional post of Lower Division Clerk,
however no such document has been brought on record to
suggest that a decision was taken at the level of the State
Government to adopt the said letter dated 20.12.2000.
Accordingly, the state government was again directed to file an
Patna High Court MJC No.620 of 2019 dt.04-11-2026
18/22
additional affidavit, that whether the same was adopted by
issuance of any letter or not and if the letter was issued, then the
same be brought on record along with the said affidavit.
12. Again, in compliance of the order dated
03.07.2026 a supplementary show cause was filed on behalf of
the opposite party nos.6 and 7 on 17.07.2026, wherein it has
been categorically mentioned that no specific letter has been
issued by the Education department of the State Government
with regard to adoption of letter no.8825 and 8826 dated
th th
20.12.2000, however while the 5 and 6 pay revisions were
being implemented in the year 2004 and 2010 respectively, for
the employees of the University and its Constituent Colleges,
the said letter dated 20.12.2000 were taken into consideration. It
has been stated that while the Education Department revised the
th
pay scale in the 5 pay revision in the year 2004, the same was
done after taking into consideration the letter no.8825 and letter
no.8826 dated 20.12.2000 of the Finance Department, which is
evident from the Parishist (Gha) of the resolution. It has been
stated that from perusal of the Parishist (Gha) of the resolution it
is clear that the LDC has been granted the pay scale of Rs.3050-
4590/- and the UDC has been granted the pay scale of Rs.4000-
6000/-, in view of the letter of the Finance Department bearing
Patna High Court MJC No.620 of 2019 dt.04-11-2026
19/22
letter no.8825 and letter no.8826 dated 20.12.2000. It has further
been stated in the supplementary show cause dated 17.07.2026
that at the cost of repetition it is humbly stated here that no
specific letter has been issued by the Finance Department of the
State Government with regard to adoption of the letter no.8825
and letter no.8826 dated 20.12.2000, however while granting the
th th
5 and 6 pay revision, the letters were taken into consideration.
Since, the letter no.8825 and letter no.8826 dated 20.12.2000
were issued by the Finance Department on the recommendation
of the Fitment Committee i.e. in continuation of the
th
implementation of the 5 pay revision, therefore, no separate
letter was required to be issued by the Education Department,
with respect to the employees of the University, in view of the
fact that the Education Department in the year 2004
th
implemented the 5 pay revision and the said letter was taken
into consideration. It has further been stated that the said letters
have also been taken into consideration in the letter dated
27.08.2010 and the Statute regarding service condition of the
University employees, notified on 04.03.2014.
13. It appears from the record that except in his
representation, describing himself as Assistant or having been
shown retired as Assistant, the petitioner in the University
Patna High Court MJC No.620 of 2019 dt.04-11-2026
20/22
records is an office Assistant and the scale payable to Office
Assistant is Rs 4000-6000, equivalent to a Routine Clerk in all
the previous pay revisions. The post of Routine Clerk, Bill Clerk
has been re-designated as that of Lower Division Assistant w.e.f.
01.01.1996 vide Memo no.1972 dated 11.10.2004,
implementing 01.01.1996 pay revision, revising the pay scale to
Rs.3050-4590/- which in terms of commitment dated 18.7.2007
in the case of State of Bihar vs Sunny Prakash (Supra) has been
raised to Rs.4000-6000/-. So far, the merger/demerger of the
posts in Clerical as well as Assistant grade is concerned, the
same only related to Lower Decision Clerk/Assistant and Upper
Division Clerk/Assistant as such the same never related to the
Office Assistant, whose pay scale was also less than even the
pay scale of Lower Division Assistant/Clerk. After demerger,
the non teaching employees getting the merger scale of Upper
Division Clark/Assistant on account of merger, were to be
known as Upper Division Clerk/Assistant.
14. The orders relied by the learned Counsel for the
petitioner passed by different Benches of this Hon’ble Court in
CWJC no.992 of 2020 on 27.11.2024, CWJC no.5454 of 2018
on 11.12.2024, CWJC no.22953 of 2018 on 18.10.2020 and
CWJC no.4722 of 2020 on 13.4.2021 would not be applicable to
Patna High Court MJC No.620 of 2019 dt.04-11-2026
21/22
the petitioner’s case, since the employees in those writ petitions
were not Office Assistant. The pay scale granted to Routine
Clerk and Office Assistant was throughout the same in
01.03.1973 pay revision, 01.04.1981 pay revision as well as
01.01.1986 pay revision. The Routine Clerk has been designated
as Lower Division Assistant w.e.f. 01.01.1996 pay revision. The
post of Lower Division Assistant/Clerk was throughout higher
than the pay scale of Routine Clerk/Office Assistant.
15. In view of the aforesaid facts and taking an overall
view regarding entitlement of the petitioner to the scale of
Rs.5500-9000/- payable to an Assistant in the University due to
merger/demerger, as well as Judgment of Hon’ble Supreme
Court in the case of Sunny Prakash (Supra), this Court is of the
considered opinion that the petitioner is not entitled to the scale
of Rs.5000-9000/, which is meant for and payable to an
Assistant in the University and the calculation as done by the
opposite parties, granting the Scale of Rs.4000-6000/, in terms
of commitment, along with other benefits of ACP, pay revision
etc. is just and proper and does not require any interference.
16. Accordingly, this Court is of the further opinion
that the opposite parties have complied the order dated
17.09.2018 passed in CWJC No.19617 of 2013 by granting the
Patna High Court MJC No.620 of 2019 dt.04-11-2026
22/22
benefits as admissible to an Office Assistant, to the petitioner.
17. Accordingly, the present contempt petition is
dismissed.
(Ritesh Kumar, J)
kunal/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE 07.08.2026
Uploading Date
Transmission Date NA