Patna High Court
Ratneshwar Prasad Singh vs The State Of Bihar on 29 August, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.12191 of 2021
======================================================
Ratneshwar Prasad Singh S/o Late Yogendra Singh Resident of Village -
Dahila Patsawan, P.S. - Gaighat, District - Muzaffarpur, the retired Assistant,
Jang Bahadur Singh Dhanaur College, Bakuchi, P.O. Katra, District -
Muzaffarpur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna
2. The Principal Secretary, Education Department, Government of Bihar,
Patna.
3. The Director Higher Education, Education Department, Government of
Bihar, Patna.
4. The Vice Chancellor B.R.A. Bihar University, Muzaffarpur.
5. The Registrar B.R.A. Bihar University, Muzaffarpur.
6. The Finance Officer, B.R.A. Bihar University, Muzaffarpur.
7. The Principal, Jang Bahadur Singh Dhanaur College, Bakuchi, P.O. - Katra,
District - Muzaffarpur.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Vijay Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the State : Ms. Abhanjalli, AC to GA-12
For the University : Mr. Satyendra Narayan Singh, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 29-08-2023
Heard Mr. Vijay Kumar Singh, learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the petitioner, Ms. Abhanjalli, learned
AC to learned GA-12 appearing on behalf of the State and Mr.
Satyendra Narayan Singh, learned counsel for the B.R.A Bihar
University, Muzaffarpur.
2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner submits that the grievance of the petitioner as claimed
for in the present writ petition is identical to the grievance of
Patna High Court CWJC No.12191 of 2021 dt.29-08-2023
one retired employee Ram Ji Paswan in whose case this Hon'ble
Court has passed order dated 25.07.2016 in CWJC No. 6426 of
2013 and upon considering the entire state of affairs as well as
law laid down by this Court as well as Hon'ble Supreme Court
has passed inter alia following observation and direction:
"In such view of the matter, it will be
relevant to quote relevant portion of the aforesaid
judgment:
" I find that decision
referred by the University Counsel,
2005(3) PLJR (SC 239) has no
application in the present case.
Petitioners were regularised in
service, in the light of order/direction
passed in the writ application. The
direction was to regularize
petitioner's service in the light of Braj
Kushore Singh's case. The date
mentioned in modification of
regularisation, in this way had no
relevant, so far consequential benefits
are concerned. Subsequently when
petitioners approach this Court for a
direction to make payment of arrears
of salary, pension and pensionary
benefits, there was no reason to
question,entitlement of these
petitioners. They were entitled for all
consequential benefits, in the light of
Full Bench decision in Braj Kishore
Singh's case, as it was a law, settled
on this point. The writ application was
disposed off giving direction to make
payment considering representations'
filed by the petitioners. In this
circumstance, the subsequent stand
taken by the Opposite party, denying
each benefit to the petitioners, on
account of date mentioned in the
Patna High Court CWJC No.12191 of 2021 dt.29-08-2023
notifications for regularisation, is
contemptuous. In their show cause,
the Opposite parties have stated that,
they have fully complied the direction
of the High Court is contrary to their
contemptuous action.
The Opposite parties are directed to
file fresh show cause, showing full
compliance of the direction of this
Court. Compliance must be in
consonance with the law settled in
Braj Kishroe Singh's case."
In view of the aforesaid discussion
applying the aforesaid principle it is an admitted
fact that petitioners have entered into service
earlier when they were not regularised they
approached this Court for regularisation, the
University constituted a Committee, found their
entry to be legal and in pursuance thereof they
have been regularised in service. The University
itself regularize the service, so at this stage plea of
the University that entries of the petitioners are
illegal and nonest as it is against violation of
Articles 14 and 16 of the constitution of India and
cannot be reopened. The only question left for
pensionary benefits whether the earlier period will
be reckoned when the petitioners have been
working right from beginning as stated
hereinabove and they were pursuing the matter of
regularisation ultimately at the behest of this Court
their services were regularised. It will be travesty
of justice to ignore the period they have discharged
in service only for the purpose of pensionary
benefits.
In such view of the matter, this Court
holds that petitioners are entitled for their
pensionary benefits from the date of initial
appointment and the period that has been spent
will be considered for the purpose of their retiral
dues. This Court is not granting the benefit of
arrears of salary but is confined for the purposes of
pensionary benefits."
Patna High Court CWJC No.12191 of 2021 dt.29-08-2023
3. Considering the specific submission made on
behalf of the petitioner, the petitioner, if so advised, may file a
detailed representation before the Registrar of the B.R.A Bihar
University, Muzaffarpur.
4. The Registrar of the B.R.A Bihar University,
Muzaffarpur, is directed to compare the case of the petitioner
with the retired employee Ram Ji Paswan and, in case, the case
of the petitioner is identical, he may take immediate steps to
make payment of all the retiral dues as claimed for in the
present writ petition in accordance with law. In case, the
registrar finds that the case of the petitioner is not identical, in
that case, he is bound to summon the petitioner and after giving
opportunity of hearing shall pass a reasoned order within a
period of six weeks. In any case, if the petitioner is entitled for
retiral dues, the same is required to be paid along with the
statutory interest within the aforesaid period of six weeks.
5. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of.
(Purnendu Singh, J)
Niraj/Nilmani
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE N/A
Uploading Date 30.08.2023
Transmission Date N/A
