Case Background
The case arose from a writ petition filed by a retired non-teaching staff member of Maharaja College, Ara, which is under Veer Kuar Singh University.
The petitioner started his service as a Lab Bearer in the Psychology Department of Maharaja College on 17.08.1968. He was appointed by the Governing Body of the college, and his initial pay scale was Rs.45 to Rs.60.
Over time, as the college and university structure changed, his pay was revised. On 21.10.1976, Magadh University fixed his salary in the pay scale of Rs.165 to Rs.204 with effect from 01.03.1973, treating the college as an affiliated college unit. Later, on 01.01.1978, when the college became a constituent college, his pay was again fixed at Rs.190 to Rs.256 by Magadh University letter no.1042 dated 05.05.1988.
The petitioner was then granted a time-bound promotion with effect from 01.01.1981, and his pay scale was fixed at Rs.425 to Rs.605.
After creation of Veer Kuar Singh University, Ara, the new university revised his pay scale to Rs.950 to Rs.1400 with effect from 01.01.1986.
The petitioner was later promoted to the post of Store Keeper in the Botany Department of Maharaja College with effect from 14.07.1995. Eventually, his pay was fixed in the scale of Rs.5200 to Rs.20200.
He retired from service on 31.07.2012 from the post of Store Keeper, Botany Department, Maharaja College, Ara.
After his retirement, a notification was issued by the Registrar of Veer Kuar Singh University. Relying on this notification, the petitioner approached the Patna High Court seeking revision of his pay and pension and payment of arrears.
What the Court Examined and Decided
The heart of the dispute lay in a university notification and subsequent clarifications issued by the State Government.
The petitioner’s case was based on memo no.665 Estb/14 dated 22.08.2014 issued by the Registrar of Veer Kuar Singh University, Ara. According to the petitioner, this memo fixed the pay scale of Rs.5500 to Rs.9000 for Store Keepers who met certain conditions.
The memo stated that Store Keepers working on sanctioned posts, appointed in accordance with rules, and working without any break in service, were to be given the pay scale of Rs.5500 to Rs.9000 with effect from 01.04.1997.
The petitioner claimed that he fulfilled these conditions. He had been appointed regularly, promoted to Store Keeper, and had worked continuously until his retirement. On this basis, he argued that his pay should be refixed in the higher scale from 01.04.1997 and that his salary and pensionary benefits should be recalculated accordingly.
In the writ petition, he specifically sought four main reliefs. First, a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to refix his pay scale from 01.04.1997 in the pay scale of Rs.5000 to Rs.9000 (the judgment records this in line with the memo fixing Rs.5500 to Rs.9000 for Store Keepers) in view of memo no.665/Establishment/14 dated 22.08.2014.
Second, a mandamus to recalculate his pay and pay statements by a competent accounting authority and thereafter revise his salary and pensionary benefits in terms of the same memo.
Third, a direction to pay him arrear salary and arrear pensionary benefits allegedly due, with interest at 12% per annum.
Fourth, any other appropriate writs or directions in the facts of the case.
The petitioner also submitted that, after the memo was issued, he had filed representations before the Registrar of Veer Kuar Singh University seeking the benefit of the higher pay scale. However, according to him, no response was given to these representations. This is what ultimately drove him to file a writ petition before the Patna High Court.
On the other side, the University and other respondents opposed the claim and filed a counter affidavit. A supplementary counter affidavit was also filed on behalf of the Registrar of Veer Kuar Singh University.
In the supplementary counter affidavit, the University placed on record two important letters issued by the Department of Education, Government of Bihar, dated 23.06.2014 and 18.09.2014 (Annexure-E series).
These letters clarified how the pay scale and grade had to be given to Store Keepers. The State Government made it clear that the pay scale and grade of Assistant would only be granted to those Store Keepers who possessed the requisite qualifications for the post of Assistant.
The crucial point in these letters was that the requisite qualification for the post of Assistant was Graduation. This meant that only Store Keepers who were graduates could be treated for pay purposes on par with Assistants and given the pay scale of Rs.5500 to Rs.9000.
The respondents pointed out that the petitioner was only matriculate. He did not have a graduation degree.
Therefore, as per the State Government’s guidelines, he did not meet the educational qualification required for the higher grade equivalent to an Assistant. On this ground, the University argued that the petitioner was not entitled to the pay scale of Rs.5500 to Rs.9000 and, correspondingly, to any refixation of pay or revision of pension based on that scale.
The Patna High Court examined these documents and submissions. The Court particularly noted the State Government’s letters annexed with the supplementary counter affidavit.
From these letters, the Court found that the policy of the State Government was clear: only those Store Keepers who had the requisite qualification for the post of Assistant, i.e., Graduation, would be given the pay scale and grade of Assistant.
Since the petitioner was merely matriculate, he fell outside the category of eligible employees under this policy.
The Court held that, in light of the State Government’s clarification and the fact that the petitioner did not meet the required qualification, his claim could not be accepted.
It concluded that he was not entitled to the pay scale of Rs.5500 to Rs.9000 as per the guidelines of the State Government.
Because the main foundation of the writ petition was his claim to this pay scale, the failure of that claim meant that his related prayers for refixation of pay, recalculation of salary and pension, and arrears with interest also could not be granted.
Accordingly, the Court held that the writ application “merits no consideration” and dismissed it.
No directions were issued in favour of the petitioner, and no further relief was granted.
Why This Judgment Matters
This judgment has practical implications for non-teaching staff in universities and colleges across Bihar, particularly those working as Store Keepers and similar posts.
First, it shows that even if a university issues a memo granting a higher pay scale to certain categories of employees, that benefit is still subject to the broader guidelines of the State Government, especially when the State’s finances or pay structure are involved.
Second, the decision underlines that educational qualification can be a decisive factor in pay scale upgradation. A long service record or regular appointment alone may not be enough if the government has clearly tied a higher pay scale to a specific qualification.
Third, for retired employees, the judgment clarifies that pensionary benefits linked to higher pay scales cannot be claimed as a matter of right unless all eligibility conditions are met, including qualification requirements issued by the State Government.
Employees in similar positions who are only matriculate or otherwise not graduates should be aware that they may not be treated as Assistants for pay purposes, even if they work on sanctioned posts or have continuous service.
From a broader perspective, the ruling reinforces that the Patna High Court will generally not override explicit policy decisions of the State Government on pay scales and qualifications, unless some illegality or arbitrariness is shown. In this case, no such allegation or finding appears on record.
Legal Issues and Answers
- Issue: Whether a retired Store Keeper of a university college, who is only matriculate, is entitled to refixation of pay and corresponding pension in the higher pay scale of Rs.5500-9000 on the basis of a university memo.
Answer: No. The Patna High Court held that, in view of State Government guidelines requiring Graduation for grant of the pay scale and grade of Assistant to Store Keepers, a matriculate employee is not entitled to this higher scale. - Issue: Whether the Court should direct payment of arrear salary, arrear pensionary benefits, and interest when the employee does not meet the qualification criteria under government policy.
Answer: No. Since the petitioner did not possess the requisite qualification and thus had no right to the higher pay scale, the Court refused to grant any arrears, revised benefits, or interest.
Cases Cited by the Court
- The judgment does not record any prior judicial decisions or case law cited or relied upon by the Court.
Case Details
Case Number: Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.7765 of 2019
Case Title: Mundrika Prasad v. The State of Bihar & Others
Citation: 2024 (2) PLJR 712
Court: High Court of Judicature at Patna
Bench: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Anjani Kumar Sharan
Date of Judgment: 01.04.2024
Nature of Case: Civil writ petition seeking refixation of pay scale, recalculation of salary and pension, and payment of arrears with interest.
Advocates:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Munna Prasad Singh, Advocate
For the State of Bihar: Mr. Pramod Kumar Singh, AC to SC-16
For Veer Kuar Singh University: Mr. P.K. Verma, Senior Advocate; Mrs. Nutan Sahay, Advocate
For the Accountant General, Bihar: Dr. Anand Kumar, Advocate; Mr. Rajan Prakash, Advocate
Link to Judgment: View full judgment on Patna High Court website
If you found this explanation helpful and wish to stay informed about
how legal developments may affect your rights in Bihar,
you may consider following Samvida Law Associates for more updates.
