Patna High Court – Orders
Vedanand Ram And Ors vs The State Of Bihar And Ors on 10 March, 2026
Author: Ajit Kumar
Bench: Ajit Kumar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.16690 of 2018
======================================================
Vedanand Ram and Ors
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State Of Bihar and Ors
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Ratan Kumar
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Anant Pd. Singh - Sc15
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
5 10-03-2026
Learned counsel for the petitioners are said to have
approached this Court by filing a writ petition being C.W.J.C.
No.899 of 2015, wherein a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court had
the occasion to dispose of a writ petition by passing the
following orders, which is extracted hereunder :-
“Similar kinds of disputes have travelled to
this Court one to many times. The question which
arises for consideration is whether a set of
employees can be paid two different pay scales by
an employer merely because one succeeded in
getting a judicial order which was upheld right up
till the Hon’ble Apex Court and the others decided
to approach the Court subsequently. This Court
had occasion to deal with such matter in quiter
detail in a batch of writ applications starting with
CWJC No.15661 of 2014 which was the case of
Md. Najmuddin & Ors. Vs. State and other
analogous cases decided on 07.04.2015. The
rationale and reasoning provided therein also
applies to the case of the present petitioners.
2. With such observations, the directions were issued
Patna High Court CWJC No.16690 of 2018(5) dt.10-03-2026
2/5
to the respondent to take a final decision in respect of these
petitioners. The order has not been complied with and the
petitioners had the occasion to file a contempt petition being
M.J.C. No.2242 of 2016, and during pendency of the contempt
petition, the State authorities had put the said order passed by
the Co-ordinate Bench under challenge in L.P.A. No.2195 of
2016, The State of Bihar and Others v. Vedanand Ram and
Others, in which following orders were passed, which is
extracted hereunder :-
Apart from the fact that there is a delay of
more than 332 days in filing of the appeal by the
State Government, the order passed by the learned
Single Judge is to the University to take a decision
comparing the case of the petitioner with similarly
situated persons and communicate the decision.
That being so, the University can examine
the matter and, for reasons to be indicated in
writing, can or cannot extend the benefit to the
petitioner. In case the University holds that the
petitioner is not entitled for the relief, it will have
to pass a reasoned and speaking order.
At this stage, when the University can
always take a decision in accordance with law, we
are not inclined to interfere into the matter.
Granting time to the University and the State
Government to take a decision in accordance with
law and the directions issued by the learned Writ
Court, we dispose of the matter.
3. It has next been submitted that the University had
also preferred a Letters Patent Appeal being L.P.A. No.1052 of
Patna High Court CWJC No.16690 of 2018(5) dt.10-03-2026
3/5
2017, The Bihar Agricultural University and Others v .
Vedanand Ram and Others, before the Hon’ble Division
Bench which also stood disposed of with the following
observations, which is extracted hereunder :-
Delay of 1 year and 234 days in filing of the
appeal is condoned and I.A. No. 5282 of 2017
stands allowed and disposed of.
Keeping in view the reasons indicated in I.A.
No.5282 of 2017 and the fact that against the same
order passed on 2.11.2015 in C.W.J.C. No. 899 of
2015, L.P.A. No. 2195 of 2012 filed by the State
Government has been disposed of by this Bench on
28.3.2018, we see no reason to reject the prayer for
condonation of delay.
Keeping in view all these factors, I.A.
No.5282 of 2017 is allowed and delay in filing of
the appeal stands condoned.
As already indicated hereinabove, against
the same impugned order passed in C.W.J.C. No.
899 of 2015 this Bench on 28.3.2018 by a detailed
order has disposed of the L.P.A. filed by the State
Government. For the reasons and grounds already
considered and indicated in the order dated
28.3.2018, we dispose of this appeal also in terms
thereof.
4. It has further been submitted that the contempt
petition being M.J.C. No.2242 of 2016, which is said to have
been filed by the petitioners was dismissed with the following
order and in view of the disposal of L.P.A. preferred by the
University as also the State Authorities including the contempt
petition disposed by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in light
Patna High Court CWJC No.16690 of 2018(5) dt.10-03-2026
4/5
of the judgment rendered in L.P.A. No.2195 of 2016, the
authorities were directed to take a final decision and the
authorities, in the shape of the impugned order, as contained in
Annexure-P/13, is said to have adjudicated the claim of these
petitioners.
5. From perusal of the order dated 18.07.2018, it
appears that there is a conflicting stand being taken by the
authorities, which is writ large on the face of the order dated
18.07.2018 wherein by referring to the Resolution No.758 dated
07.02.2013, the authorities have treated a Class within Class,
whereas there was no restrictions imposed upon the authorities
to treat similarly situated persons differently and these
petitioners are said to have been treated differently and the
benefits for which the petitioners are also entitled, at par with
the others, has also not been allowed to them.
6. The authorities of the State and as also the
respondent-University are directed to file an appropriate
response, as the case of these petitioners have not been
considered strictly in consonance with the observations made by
a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, wherein, it has been
specifically mentioned that the rationale and the reasonings,
indicated in the case of Md. Najmuddin & Ors. v. The State of
Patna High Court CWJC No.16690 of 2018(5) dt.10-03-2026
5/5
Bihar and Others (supra), equally applies in the case of these
petitioners, still contrary to such observations, the impugned
orders have been passed.
7. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioners
seek permission to challenge the impugned resolution.
8. Permission is accordingly granted.
9. Post this case after a period of four weeks, i.e. on
07.04.2026, for filing appropriate response.
10. It goes without saying that during the course of
consideration, if the authorities finds that the case of these
petitioners have not been considered strictly in consonance with
the directions issued by a Co-ordinate Bench, then necessary
corrective measures can be taken within the time so prescribed.
(Ajit Kumar, J)
sharun/-
U
