Intra-court appeal dismissed; court emphasizes binding nature of counsel agreements and precedents
In a significant decision, the Patna High Court dismissed an intra-court appeal filed by the State of Bihar challenging a Single Judge's order regarding the fixed salaries of teachers in Non-Government recognized aided Sanskrit Schools and Madarsas. The Division Bench, comprising Mr. Sudhir Singh and Mr. Rajesh Kumar Verma, reinforced the binding nature of previously established judicial agreements and precedents.
The appeal originated from a dispute over Clause-6 of Resolution No. 970 dated August 31, 2013, which mandated fixed salaries for teaching and non-teaching staff appointed on or after February 15, 2011. The Single Judge had quashed this resolution, granting consequential benefits to the petitioners, referencing a Division Bench's earlier judgment in C.W.J.C. No. 985 of 2015 (Imran Alam & Ors. v. The State of Bihar & Ors.).
Representing the State, Mr. Anil Kumar argued that the Single Judge should have deferred the writ petition pending a restoration application concerning the earlier judgment. However, the respondents' counsel, Mr. Sriram Krishna and others, maintained that the matter had been conclusively settled by binding Division Bench judgments, justifying the Single Judge's order.
The Division Bench upheld the Single Judge's decision, emphasizing that statements recorded as made by counsel in a judgment are conclusive and binding. Referring to the precedent set in the Supreme Court's decision in State of Maharashtra v. Ramdas Shrinivas Nayak, the bench asserted that the correctness of recorded submissions cannot be reopened in appellate proceedings.
The court concluded that the appeal lacked merit as the parties had previously agreed that the issue was resolved by binding precedent. As such, the appellants were barred from re-litigating the matter. The bench found no illegality or infirmity in the Single Judge's order warranting appellate interference.
With this dismissal, the affected Sanskrit school teachers and staff are entitled to regular pay scales as per the pre-2011 recognition criteria, aligning with the court's directive to quash the contested resolution.
Bottom Line:
The appellate court cannot interfere with a single judge's order based on the recorded agreement of counsel, where it is established that the issue was concluded by binding precedents.
Statutory provision(s):
- Civil Procedure Code
- Judicial Precedents and Binding Nature
- Delay Condonation Principles
State of Bihar v. Sanjay Kumar Tiwari, (Patna)(DB) : Law Finder Doc id # 2878061
