AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Date : 20-08-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.
The present writ petition has been filed for the following relief/s:-
“I. For issuance of a writ in the nature of Certiorari, quashing the order contained in Memo No. 744 dated 06.03.2024 issued by Director, Account Administration and Self-Employment, District Rural Development Agency, Gaya, (hereinafter referred to as "Impugned Order")-whereby and whereunder, petitioner has been terminated from the post of Stenographer, District Rural Development Agency, Gaya after working for more than 24 years, by passing a totally mischievous and illegal order stating inter-alia that District Rural Development Agency, Gaya, have ceased to exist, therefore, services of petitioner is also terminated - ignoring the fact that process of absorption of employees working in the District Rural Development Agency, in the respective districts is under consideration at the level of Rural Development Department, Government of Bihar, Patna and the name of petitioner has been also sent for absorption.
II. For issuance of writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ for directing the respondent authorities to immediately reinstate the petitioner on the post of stenographer, where he was working till his removal, with all consequential benefit.
III. For issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus, directing and commanding upon the respondent authorities to immediately take decision on the question of absorption of petitioner as his name has been sent for absorption, in view of the decision taken by the Rural Development Department, Government of Bihar, Patna to absorb employees, who are/were working in the District Rural Development Agency at various district.
IV. For issuance of writ in the nature of Mandamus, directing and commanding upon the respondent authorities to pay the arrears of salary due to the petitioner.
V. For any other order(s) or direction(s) which your lordship may deem fit and proper in the interest of equity, justice and good conscience.
VI. Cost of this litigation.”
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has filed series of representations for fulfillment of his grievance (annexed as Annexure-P/18 series). Counsel further submits that two similarly situated persons have moved before this Hon’ble Court in C.W.J.C. No. 13854 of 2024 (Ranjeet Ranjan Malakar & Anr. Vs. The State of Bihar & Ors.) which was disposed of vide order dated 12.09.2024. Counsel submits that in the light of observation made in the said writ petition, the D.D.C., Gaya has passed order in which only one part is allowed that till termination of their services, the petitioners are entitled for the salary beyond which no other relief was granted. Counsel submits that the petitioner has crossed the age of superannuation, therefore, he is only confined his prayer to grant relief relating to payment of honorarium till the date of his removal.
Learned counsel for the State submits that vide Annexure-E of the supplementary counter affidavit filed on behalf of respondent nos. 2 to 5, order has been passed contained in Memo No. 661 dated 17.02.2025 by which it become crystal clear that those two similarly situated persons were granted relief only and only with regard to the payment of honorarium till date of their termination, beyond which petitioner is not entitled for anything.
In this view of the matter, liberty is hereby granted to the petitioner to file a fresh representation and raise his claim for payment of honorarium till the date of his termination of contractual service before the Deputy Development Commissioner, Gaya (Respondent no.4) along with a copy of this order, within 30 days from today. Upon receipt of the same, the Respondent no. 4 shall pass a reasoned and speaking order with regard to the petitioner as like that of order passed with regard to two other similarly situated persons as contained in Memo No. 661 dated 17.02.2025 if case of petitioner is identical to them, within 90 days thereafter. It is made clear that if the petitioner is found entitled for payment of his honorarium then the said honorarium must be paid to him within 30 days thereafter.
Accordingly, with the aforesaid direction, this writ petition stands disposed off.