When an institution is functional, the administrative authority in control is liable for salary arrears. Authorities cannot evade this liability by raising unsubstantiated claims regarding employment status or institutional existence, particularly to delay payments to retired, ailing employees, as such conduct constitutes a failure of a welfare state.

JUDGMENT :

1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. This appeal is directed against the learned Single Judge’s order dated 02.04.2024 allowing W.P. (S) No. 2933 of 2014 instituted by the respondents, whereby the appellant i.e., the State of Bihar was directed to release the amount of salary including benefits of pay revision for the period between 01.01.1999 and 2007 together with interest @ 6% per annum.

3. Mr. S P Roy, learned counsel for the appellant, forcibly submitted that the correspondence on record shows that the employees of the North Koyal Project High School, Mandal, Latehar, were never regularised and were only daily wagers. Therefore, he submits that there was no question of such teachers being entitled to payments on regular scale.

4. Mr. S P Roy was unclear about whether or not he was pressing the defence that was taken in the writ petition and it seems to be the only defence that was seriously pressed before the learned Single Judge i.e., the school at Mandal was closed or was not functioning according to the letter dated 24.03.2000, which was produced along with the counter affidavit. In any event, since that appears to be the only defence, which was taken and pressed before the learned Single Judge, we propose to deal with the said defence, as if, the same has now been urged as a ground in support of this appeal.

5. Mr. Ratnesh Kumar, learned S.C. (L&C)-I appearing on behalf of the State of Jharkhand, supported the impugned order based on the reasoning reflected therein. He submits that up to 2007, the school in question was under the control of State of Bihar and there was no justification for the State of Bihar for not releasing the salary and other payments for its teachers. He submits that after 2007, the State of Jharkhand has assumed full responsibility and has been paying the salary and other benefits to the employees. Accordingly, he submits that this appeal may be dismissed.

6. Mr. Amit Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for the teachers i.e., the original petitioners in W.P. (S) No. 2933 of 2014 also urged dismissal of this appeal. He submits that in any event, there is some dispute between the States of Bihar and Jharkhand and the petitioners, who are Class-III and Class-IV employees and have now retired and are old and ailing, should not be made to suffer any further. He also urges that this appeal may be dismissed and payments, as directed, made at the earliest.

7. The rival contentions now fall for our determination.

8. At the outset, we note that the State of Bihar has pressed its might in this appeal only with an attempt to deprive six Class-III and Class-IV employees of certain financial benefits awarded to them by the learned Single Judge’s order. This is quite unfortunate.

9. From the dispute raised, it does appear that no serious fault is sought to be attributed to the Class-III and Class-IV employees, who have by now retired and are old and ailing, as observed by the learned Single Judge in the impugned order, but the dispute is between the States of Bihar and Jharkhand regarding the liability to pay. In such a situation, it is not quite fair that the employees’ misery is prolonged any further. The argument about these employees not being regularised or being daily wagers was sought to be supported by referring to a communication dated 03.06.2013 by the Executive Engineer, Auranga Construction Circle, Palamau. Based upon such a correspondence, there is no question of sustaining such a plea.

10. Crucially, the plea about