IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.22427 of 2012

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

1. Hari Kishore Singh Son Of Sri Ram Pratap Singh Resident Of Village -

Rajpur, P.O. - Barharwa, P.S. - Mejorganj, Block - Suppi, District -

Sitamarhi, Posted As Headmaster, Achaldev Sanskrit Middle School,

Ratanpur Sirpalpur, Rajpur, P.O. - Barharwa, Anchal - Suppi, District -

Sitamarhi

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State Of Bihar

2. The Principal Secretary, Human Resources Development Department,

Bihar, Patna

3. The Special Director, Secondary Education, Human Resources

Development Department, Bihar, Patna

4. The District Magistrate, Sitamarhi

5. The District Program Officer (Establishment), Sitamarhi

6. The Bihar Sanskrit Shiksha Board, Patna Through Its Chairman

7. The Chairman, Bihar Sanskrit Shiksha Board, Patna

8. The Secretary, Bihar Sanskrit Shiksha Board, Patna

.... .... Respondent/s

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

Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr.

For the Respondent/s : Mr.

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

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN SINHA

ORAL ORDER

2

19-12-2012

Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner, State and the Bihar

Sanskrit Shiksha Board.

The petitioner stated to be Headmaster of the Achaldeo Sanskrit

Middle School, Ratanpur, Sirpalpur, Rajpur, District Sitamarhi seeks a

direction for release of funds to enable payment of salary to the teachers of

the Non Government Sanskrit School, contended to be affiliated to the Bihar

State Sanskrit Shiksha Board.

Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that funds were not

released on account of paucity of funds. He relies on an order in CWJC No.

15 of 2011 and prays that the writ application may likewise be disposed to

consider the representation.

Patna High Court CWJC No.22427 of 2012 (2) dt.19-12-2012

2

Counsel for the State submits that he is not in a position to make

any submission on facts in absence of opportunity to take instruction.

The Court has perused the order in CWJC No. 15 of 2011 which

simply directs disposal of representation. In the case of C Jacob v. Director

of Geology and Mining (2008) 10 SCC 115, caution been sounded in

passing innocuous orders for consideration of representation creating cause

of action where none may have existed. Salary is a statutory right subject to

appointment in accordance with law and due discharge of duties. Likewise

grant in aid is not a matter of right but is wholly dependent on the policy

regulating the same. It has to be kept in mind that grant in aid is generated

from the tax payers’ money contributed at the people expense and the

Government has a strict duty to ensure that it is utilised only in the manner

permissible and strictly in accordance with law.

The representation may be considered in the light of the

aforesaid discussion and disposed by Respondent no. 5 by a reasoned and

speaking order preferably within a maximum period of three months from

the date of receipt and/or presentation of a copy of this order.

The writ application stands disposed.

Snkumar/-

(Navin Sinha, J)