✦ High Court of India

Patna High Court

Case Details

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.938 of 2012 ====================================================== 1. Mira Srivastava W/O Ashok Prasad Srivastava Resident Of Village- Karmanwa, P.S- Dhaka, District- East Champaran. .... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State Of Bihar through the Secretary, Human Resources Department, New Secretariat, Patna, Bihar 2. Mr. Vinod Kumar, The Vice Chancellor, Bihar University, Muzaffarpur. 3.The Registrar, Bihar University, Muzaffarpur. 4.The Finance Officer, Bihar University, Muzaffarpur. 5..The Principal, Jawaharlal Nehru Memorial College, Ghorasahan, East Champaran. .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Binod Kumar Mishra For the Respondent/s : Mr. Radhika Raman GP-23 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KISHORE KUMAR MANDAL ORAL ORDER 13 16-01-2013 Heard Mr. Verma in support of the application and Mr. Tiwary for the University and its officials. Diverse show causes have been filed on behalf of the opposite parties. Petitioner has filed rejoinder(s) thereto which are on record. The present application raises a grievance that the order dated 11.8.2010 preferred by the petitioner vide C.W.J.C. No. 16015 of 2001 (Annexure-1) have been deliberately and/or wilfully disregarded by the opposite parties and, as such, the contempt proceeding be initiated and the erring officials be punished therefor.

Legal Reasoning

Patna High Court MJC No.938 of 2012 (13) dt.16-01-2013 2 Petitioner claims to have been appointed by the Governing Body of the then privately managed college namely Jawaharlal Nehru Memorial College, Ghorasahan. As she was not being paid the salary, she filed a writ petition before this Court vide C.W.J.C. No. 6242 of 1989 praying, inter alia, payment of salary as also a direction to regularize her service against the sanctioned/vacant post of peon. The said application was disposed of with observation/direction that the Vice Chancellor will consider and dispose of the representation of the petitioner. In the light of the said representation, an enquiry was made in which the petitioner was also granted liberty to appear and thereafter an order dated 22.11.1991 was passed regularizing her service on the post of Peon and she is thereafter being paid her salary regularly. The petitioner filed another writ petition i.e. C.W.J.C. No. 16015 of 2001 seeking a direction to make payment of arrears of salary with consequential benefits for the period 5.2.1981 to 22.11.1981.

Decision

The said writ petition was disposed of in the following terms: “Considering the fact that rival documents have been annexed, as such it is desirable that the case of the petitioner be considered at the level of the University itself. The University will examine all connected records/documents in this regard and in case it is found that Annexure-3 is a genuine document and the petitioner has discharged her duty with effect from the date she was appointed by the Governing body the respondent i.e. 3.7.1980, University will decide her claim in a positive Patna High Court MJC No.938 of 2012 (13) dt.16-01-2013 3 manner and will allow her the arrears of salary as well as other consequential benefits. In case on the other hand, it is found that the document Annexure- 3 is a manufacture one and the petitioner has never worked against the sanctioned post with effect from 3.7.1980, there is no reason for allowing benefit claimed by the petitioner. The Vice Chancellor as well as Registrar of the University will pass all necessary orders in this the date of regard within six months production/communication of this order and in case of rejection of petitioner's case reasoned order will be passed by the University. from In the light of the aforesaid order, the Vice Chancellor passed a reasoned order on 17.10.2012 (Annexure-D to the supplementary show cause on behalf of the O.P. Nos. 2 to 4). The opposite parties have filed another show cause (titled as second supplementary show cause) wherein the following facts have been averred in paragraph Nos. 2 and 3: “2. That it is a fact that the petitioner was appointed as Class IV employee at J.L.N.M. College, Ghorasahan by the Governing Body of the College on 27.5.1980 against non-existent post and the petitioner Meera Srivastava has joined the post as Peon Girls Common Room on 03.07.1980. The said post alongwith others was sanctioned by the State Govt. vide letter No. 207 dated 05.02.1981. 3. That consequent upon the sanction of posts, the O.P. University has regularized the services of all other non-teaching employees working and continuing in the college by the office order Memo No. B/2121 dated 10.05.1984, but since the petitioner Meera Srivastava was not regular in the college, her services has not regularized by the university. As regards her continuity in college prior to her regularization, the college has reported that the petitioner Meera Srivastava was not Patna High Court MJC No.938 of 2012 (13) dt.16-01-2013 4 regularly present in the college.” Learned counsel for the petitioner, relying on few documents enclosed with the rejoinder, submits that there is/are documents emanating from the University and/or the Government to show that 14 posts were approved/sanctioned by the Government for the college in question, still the name of the petitioner was omitted by the opposite parties while granting regularization with effect from the date of appointment. Learned counsel for the University and its officials, on the other hand, has contended that from the documents enclosed alongwith the show cause (Annexures-A and B to the supplementary show cause on behalf of O.P. Nos. 2 to 4 and the report submitted by the Principal of the College), it would appear that the petitioner was never regularly attending the job on which she claims to have been appointed by the Governing Body. The appointment is said to have been made by the Government Body on 3.7.1980 as Peon of Girls Common Room whereas the said post has been sanctioned by the Government subsequently on 5.2.1981. The Vice Chancellor in his reasoned order has recorded reasons for not regularizing her from anterior date and therefore payment of salary for the period between 5.2.1981 to 22.11.1991 to the petitioner. Patna High Court MJC No.938 of 2012 (13) dt.16-01-2013 5 From perusal of the materials on record and after hearing rival submissions of the parties, it appears from Annexure- B that the University after making appropriate enquiry with regard to grant of regularization to the 4th Grade employees of the said college passed an order on 10.5.1984 whereby 13 non-teaching employees of the said college ignoring the petitioner was regularized. The said order was never challenged by the petitioner before this Court. Instead, the petitioner filed C.W.J.C. No. 6242 of 1989 seeking a direction for consideration of her case for regularization of her service against sanctioned post. In the light of the said order, she was considered and accorded regularization of service with effect from 22.11.1991. Without challenging the aforesaid order granting regularization of service w.e.f. 22.11.1991, she filed the writ petition for payment of arrears of salary for the period 5.2.1981 to 22.11.1991. The said claim was considered by the University and its officials on the basis of diverse records including the attendance register available with the college and by an order dated 17.10.2012 passed by the Vice Chancellor, the said claim was rejected on the ground disclosed therein. In the setting of these facts, in my view, it cannot be said that the opposite parties have acted in deliberate and/or wilful Patna High Court MJC No.938 of 2012 (13) dt.16-01-2013 6 disregard of the order of this Court. The application, therefore, deserves to be dismissed. It is accordingly dismissed. Dismissal of this application shall, however, not come in the way of the petitioner from seeking appropriate relief before the appropriate authority/forum in accordance with law. Pankaj/- (Kishore Kumar Mandal, J)

This is the original judgment text as indexed from the source corpus. Always verify against the official court record before relying on it in a filing — you can do so on eCourts or the Supreme Court of India website. ← Search more judgments