Justice Sudhir Singh led bench upholds verdict by Justice Anjani Kumar Sharan, resusing to interfere with State govt's policy decision

In Payal Singh vs. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Education Department, Government of Bihar & Ors. (2025), Patna High Court's Division Bench of Justices Sudhir Singh and Ramesh Chand Malviya delivered a 10-page long judgement dated July 5, 2025 dismissing the petition.The judgement authored by Justice Singh reads:"We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have also gone through the impugned order passed by the learned Single Judge. The only question that arises for consideration by this Court is whether the order passed by interference. 10. We find no valid reason to interfere with the order passed by the learned Single Judge. Fixation of salary and grant of pay scale in service is a matter of policy to be decided by the employer, i.e., the State Government, and this Court should not interfere in such policy decisions....11. It is a settled position of law that the terms and conditions of service are to be governed by either the advertisement or the appointment letter, subject to not being in contravention to any statutory rules or circulars having statutory force. Therefore, in the present case, the issue of entitlement of salary/pay scale is to be governed by approval of appointment made by the Director, Secondary Education. 12. Accordingly, we do not find any merit in this appeal, and the same is dismissed." 

In Payal Singh vs. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Education Department, Government of Bihar & Ors. (2024), Justice Anjani Kumar Sharan had delivered a 15-page long judgement dated March 14, 2024. Justice Sharan concluded: "14. Considering the facts and circumstance of the case, argument of the parties and from perusal of the records it is fact that the fixation of salary etc., is the policy decision of the State Government and the Court is not in a position to interfere in the policy decision of the Government, accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed."  The petitioner had prayed for issuance of a writ in the nature of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction to quash that part of the order contained in letter no. 768 dated 10.09.2014 issued by the Director Secondary Education Bihar, basing himself on Education Department Memo no.921 dated 8.8.2013, to the extent it directs fixation of salary of teachers appointed in aided minority schools on par with teachers appointed in Govt taken over schools under the Teacher appointment Rules 2006. She had prayed for quashing the Department Resolution /order contained in Education Department Memo No. 921 dated 8-8-2013 in that it, wholly ignoring the nature of appointment made against existing vacancy in sanctioned existing post and directing fixation of pay of teachers appointed in minority schools on par with Niyojan teachers appointed under Teacher appointment Rules 2006 as it infringes right of minorities under article 30 of the
Constitution of India. She wanted the state Respondents to re-fix the pay scale of the petitioner under the 6th pay scale as applicable to the Assistant Teachers appointed against vacancy in sanctioned post of teachers in aided Minority Secondary Schools which is to be on par with the pay scale of assistant teachers under regular appointment against post of teachers in Government Secondary Schools. She sought a direction to the state respondents to pay the Arrears of salary due to the petitioner from April 2, 2012 the date of appointment of petitioner up to date with interest for the period of delay in actual payment.