SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Headnote Court Copy Facts Arguments Court observation Judicial Analysis Case Map Category Hierarchy Table of Content
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Pat) 2018

PATNA HIGH COURT
A. Abhishek Reddy, J
Santosh Kumar – Appellant
Versus
The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Department of Education, Government of Bihar – Respondent
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.15663 of 2022



Important Points

The court emphasized the necessity of equitable treatment for similarly situated employees in matters of promotion and benefits as per precedential judgments.

Subject

Administrative Law - Writ Jurisdiction

Headnote

The Court examined the legal framework concerning employee appointments under the Department of Education, specifically referencing relevant principles from (2008) 7 SCC 728. The petitioners sought similar benefits, citing prior judgments. The court found merit in the petitioners' claims based on precedential judgments, leading to an order to extend benefits akin to those previously awarded to similarly situated employees. The result dictated the granting of seniority and increments, mandating expedited processing within eight weeks.

Advocates:
For the Petitioners: Mr.Umesh Kumar
For the Respondents: Smt. Binita Singh (Sc28)

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. ABHISHEK REDDY ORAL ORDER

17 08-12-2025 Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits that the matter is squarely covered by the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court reported in (2008) 7 SCC 728 ( Balwant Singh Narwal and Ors. V. State of Haryana and Ors. ). Counsel submits that the petitioners are similarly situated and this Hon’ble Court vide order, dated 03.04.2018, passed in C.W.J.C. No. 13797 of 2016 in the similar circumstances have allowed the prayer sought for in the said Writ Petition. Counsel submits that in view of the orders of the Hon’ble Supreme Court the present Writ Petition may be allowed and the prayer sought for in the present Writ Petition may be granted.

2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondent-State, on instructions, fairly submits that the matter is squarely covered by the judgment relied by the petitioner reported in (2008) 7 SCC 728

3. Having regard to the same the present Writ Petition is allowed. Consequently the Respondent-Authority is directed to grant the same benefits of seniority, annual increment, ACP etc. as has been extended to the similarly situated employees who were appointed earlier pursuant to the said advertisement.

4. The authority shall endeavour to calculate and pay the benefits as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

5. With the above directions, the Writ Petition stands allowed to the extent indicate.

(A. Abhishek Reddy , J)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top