IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Letters Patent Appeal No.129 of 2025 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.19091 of 2014 ======================================================

1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Department of Education, Government of Bihar, Patna.

2. The Principal Secretary, Department of Education, Government of Bihar, Patna.

3. The Principal Secretary, Department of Finance, Government of Bihar, Patna.

4. The Director (Primary Education), Government of Bihar, Patna.

5. The District Education Officer, Patna.

6. The District Programme Officer (Establishment), Patna.

... ... Appellant/s Versus Ramashankar Gupta S/o Sri Sheomuni Sah R/o Mohalla Salempur Dumra, P.O. B.V. College, P.S.-Airport, Rajabajar, District Patna, Presently Posted in Navsrijit Primary School Bank, Maner, Patna.

... ... Respondent/s ======================================================

Appearance :

For the Appellant/s : Mr. P.K. Shahi, Sr. Adv.

Mr. Prashant Pratap, Adv.

For the Respondent/s : Mr. Amarendra Kumar, Adv.

Mr. Ujjawal Bhushan, Adv.

======================================================

CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR SINHA

ORAL JUDGMENT

(Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE)

Date : 10-02-2026 The present Letters Patent Appeal has been filed by the State of Bihar, challenging the order of the learned Single Judge dated 30.01.2024 passed in CWJC No.19091 of 2014.

2. The original writ petition was filed by the respondent, Ramashankar Gupta, seeking a mandamus directing to the respondent-State to grant him matric trained scale of pay w.e.f. the date the other similarly situated untrained teachers were granted the same i.e. 01.10.2003 along with all consequential benefits.

3. It is the case of the petitioner that he was appointed to the post of Assistant Teacher in the district of Saharsa vide memo no.619-14 dated 11.04.2000 by the District Superintendent of Education, Saharsa, following the recommendation of the B.P.S.C. The State Government vide Notification No.2055 dated 01.10.1991, promulgated the Bihar Elementary School Appointment Rules 1991 which prescribed the minimum requisite qualification as 45% marks in matriculation or equivalent. The petitioner further contends that subsequent to his appointment, he was sent for training during 2000-2001 session and completed his training successfully. The examination of the training course was conducted in the year 2004 and the result were published on 20.06.2005. It is the further case of the writ petitioner that he completed the intermediate Arts in the year 2009 and B.A. in the year 2012.

4. The petitioner seeks relief primarily on the grounds of parity, contending that the present matter is squarely covered by the ratio decidendi in Chandrakant & others Vs. The State of Bihar & Others reported in 2010 (4) P.L.J.R.732. In the aforementioned precedent, this Court granted relief to the petitioners therein and the petitioner herein asserts that his circumstances are identical in nature. It is further the case of the writ petitioner that the Department issued Letter no.122 dated 10.02.2012, pursuant to which the benefits of the Resolution no. 790 dated 29.07.2011 were extended to all the untrained appointees who successfully cleared their training examination till June, 2005 given that the petitioner was declared successful in the examination in the first attempt, but his pay scale was subsequently fixed in the ‘Matric Trained Scale’ by the concerned Drawing and Disbursing Officer w.e.f. the date of publication of the result of the training i.e. 20.06.2005. The grounds raised in the writ petition emphasize that the action of the Respondents specifically in granting the trained scale w.e.f. the date of passing of the training examination is manifestly arbitrary and discriminatory. Such actions creates an unlawful classification, particularly as peers appointed alongside the petitioner have already been promoted to the cadre of Headmaster with