Shahnaz Zakia v. State of Bihar
Case at a glance
- Decided
- 21 Jan 2013
- Bench
- S N HUSSAIN
Key paragraphs
- Para 88. In the said circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of. However, the petitioner will be at liberty to raise her claim of arrears before the authority concerned, who will decide it in accordance with law as well as its own earlier decision as referred…
Judgment
.... .... Respondents ====================================================== For the Petitioner : Mr. Arun Kumar, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Rajesh Kumar Verma, SC-27 For the Magadh University: M/s Anil Kumar Sinha and Shakib Ayaz, Advocates. ====================================================== P R E S E N T : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.N. HUSSAIN ORDER 11 21-01-2013 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the State of Bihar and its authorities as well as learned counsel for the Magadh University.
This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner for the following reliefs:- respect of meeting (i) For commanding respondent nos.1 and 2 to take a final decision expenditure by way of deficit grant to Soghra College, Biharsharif in the light of its decision contained in memo no.2740 dated 29.09.2005 whereby and whereunder the Government had sought a report from respondent no.4, the Magadh financial respect University with Patna High Court CWJC No.11584 of 2006 (11) dt.21-01-2013 2 implication on account of the decision to declare Soghra College, Biharsharif as a deficit grant college. establishment (ii) For holding and declaring that the Government decision contained in its resolution in memo no.1065 dated 09.12.1982 in no way affects the government policy to meet the entire expenditure Minority College/Institutions and that the Soghra College Biharsharif having created its post on 18.11.1979, being duly approved by the State Government vide its letter dated 25.02.1992 and having been granted affiliation by the State Government of Bihar w.e.f.
1980-81 academic sessions will not be in any way adversely affected by the said government decision dated 09.12.1982. a of meeting arbitrary but is not only (iii) For also holding and declaring that the earlier decision of the State Government of Bihar dated 30.08.1995 refusing to release the deficit grant only in the case of Soghra College, Biharsharif, Nalanda discriminatory in as much as such deficit grant by establishment by way of deficit grant of an exactly and similarly situated minority institution, namely Allama Iqbal College, Biharsharif has been ultimately allowed by the State Government its order dated 09.09.1998 despite subsequent rejection by the State of Bihar to the effect that said college was not entitled for such deficit grant in view of the government resolution dated 09.12.1982. expenditure entire (iv) For commanding the respondents to treat the college of the petitioner at par with other minority the affiliated colleges institutions including Allama Iqbal College, Biharsharif, Nalanda in the matter of grant of deficit grant in Aid. including (v) To hold and declare that the college is entitled to be treated as a recipient of deficit grant in aid from the government keeping in view the fact that Patna High Court CWJC No.11584 of 2006 (11) dt.21-01-2013 3 it has been validly declared as a minority institution by the Government of Bihar.
(vi) To command the respondents and direct them to release necessary funds in the name of the college for making current as well as arrears of payment to the Teaching & Non-Teaching Employees of the College including this petitioner since the date of their initial appointment. (vii) For any other appropriate relief/reliefs to which the petitioner is found entitled in the facts and circumstances of this case.
It is not in dispute that the college concerned, namely Soghra College, Biharsharif, Nalanda is a minority institution under Magadh University and the petitioner has been appointed therein as a Lecturer in the Department of Home Science in the year 1987 on the post created by Governing Body in the year 1979 after following all the prescribed procedures of appointment and the said appointment received approval of College Service Commission vide its memo no.4/04 dated
15.05.1997. Hence the claim of petitioner is that she is entitled for receiving payment of salary from the fund of State Government to be released by way of deficit grant to the college because it is a minority institution as declared by the government itself vide letter no.1265 dated 15.10.1985 and hence government’s decisions dated 13.12.1980 and 06.11.1985 make the college entitled for payment of salary to all its teachers whose Patna High Court CWJC No.11584 of 2006 (11) dt.21-01-2013 4 appointments and services have been approved by the College Service Commission.
A supplementary affidavit has been filed on behalf of the petitioner stating that during the pendency of this writ petition, the State Government vide its order contained in memo no.1994 dated 22.06.2010 had given its approval to the college for the status of deficit grant in aid and the posts were duly approved by the State Government, vide its various letters, with the financial liability. Hence the claim of petitioner is that she should be granted the arrears of salary from the date of her appointment, but the government is giving salary to her for the period after the said order dated 22.06.2010.
Learned counsel for the State of Bihar and its authorities files a counter affidavit stating that the State Government vide order dated 22.06.2010 contained in memo no.1994 had decided to grant deficit to minority institution, namely Soghra College, Biharsharif, Nalanda and, therefore, the employees of college in question are entitled to financial assistance only with effect from 22.06.2010 and not before that period.
Learned counsel for the Magadh University submits that petitioner’s college is governed by its own Managing Patna High Court CWJC No.11584 of 2006 (11) dt.21-01-2013 5 Committee and grant of aid is made directly by the State Government itself.
Considering the averments made by learned counsel for the parties and the materials on record, it is quite apparent that most of the reliefs claimed by the petitioner have been granted by the respondents authorities of the State by holding the college to be entitled to deficit grant in aid pursuant to orders of the High Court passed in CWJC No.146 of 1996 as well as in M.J.C. No.1180 of 2009. Furthermore, the petitioner and other employees are being paid their salaries with effect from the date of the said order dated 22.06.2010 passed by the authorities of the State. Now the only question which remains to be considered is with respect to the arrears of salary of the petitioner but it is stated on behalf of the respondents that since order dated
22.06.2010 had no retrospective effect, payment can be made for a period only thereafter.
In the said circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of. However, the petitioner will be at liberty to raise her claim of arrears before the authority concerned, who will decide it in accordance with law as well as its own earlier decision as referred in letter dated 22.06.2010. Harish/- (S.N. Hussain, J)
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.