Facts
Thirty-one petitioners, serving as Sub-Inspectors and Hawaldars in the Bihar Special Armed Police (BSAP), filed a writ petition seeking a re-fixation of their pay scales.
Source reference: p. 1-3They claimed entitlement to the 1st ACP in the scale of Rs. 4000-6000 and the 2nd ACP/MACP in the scale of Rs. 5500-9000, asserting they belong to the "literate cadre".
Source reference: p. 4-5The petitioners sought parity with the judgment delivered in LPA No. 458 of 2021 dated 26.04.2024, citing Clause 4.C(1) of the Bihar Litigation Policy, 2011.
Source reference: p. 5During proceedings, Petitioner No. 22 was deleted from the array of parties as having been wrongly included.
Source reference: p. 3-4The State raised a preliminary objection regarding the maintainability of the writ, pointing toward an alternative statutory remedy for grievance redressal.
Source reference: p. 5-6Issues
Whether the petitioners must exhaust the alternative remedy provided under the Bihar Government Servant Grievance Redressal Rules, 2019, before seeking a writ of mandamus for pay scale re-fixation.
Source reference: p. 6-8Law Applied
Specifically, Rule 2(c) defines "Complaint" to include all matters relating to service benefits, including salary payment, increments, ACP, and MACP.
Source reference: p. 6Rule 3 prescribes the mandatory procedure for filing such complaints via online mode for both serving and retired personnel.
Source reference: p. 7The Bihar Litigation Policy, 2011, which mandates that similarly situated employees should be granted benefits of settled law to avoid unnecessary litigation.
Source reference: p. 5Reasoning
The Court analyzed the statutory framework of the 2019 Rules and determined that the petitioners' grievances—specifically regarding pay re-fixation, ACP, and MACP benefits—fall squarely within the definition of a "complaint" under Rule 2(c).
Source reference: p. 6The Court observed that the Rules of 2019 were specifically framed by the General Administration Department to handle such service-related disputes through a dedicated administrative mechanism.
Source reference: p. 5-6Jurisdictionally, the Court found it appropriate to direct the petitioners to this specialized forum rather than adjudicating the merits of the pay scale claims under Article 226 at this stage.
Source reference: p. 8Holding
The Court declined to exercise its writ jurisdiction on the merits and disposed of the petition by directing the petitioners to avail themselves of the alternative remedy under the Bihar Government Servant Grievance Redressal Rules, 2019.
The petitioners were granted 30 days to file their complaints before the concerned authority, and the authority was directed to decide the matter within the timeframe specified in the Rules.
Source reference: p. 8Original Court PDF
Dinesh DubeyvsThe State of Bihar
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in