Patna High Court
Dr. Shiv Lochan Jha vs Dr. Ramesh Jha on 19 October, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Letters Patent Appeal No.1376 of 2019
In
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.7039 of 2011
======================================================
1. Dr. Shiv Lochan Jha, Son of Late Badri Narayan Jha, at present posted as
Principal in Kalyani Mithila Sanskrit College, Deep, District- Madhubani.
2. Dr. Bhaglu Jha, Son of Chandra Kant Jha, at present posted as Principal in
Ram Autar Gautam Sanskrit College, Ahilya Asthan, Darbhanga.
3. Dr. Prem Kant Jha, son of Kameshwar Jha, at present posted in Nandan
Sanskrit College, Ishahpur, Sarisabpahi District- Madhubani.
4. Dr. Dinesh Jha, Son of Late Nand Kishore Jha, at present posted as Principal
in Bab Saheb Ram Sanskrit College, Pacharhi, District- Madhubani.
5. Dr. Manoj Kumar, Son of Sri Ram Krishna Jha, at Present posted as
Principal in Government Sanskrit College, Kajipur, District- Patna.
6. Dr. Ashok Kumar Ajad, Son of Priyavarta Prasad Yadav, at present posted as
Principal Aknil Bharti Sanskrit Hindi Vidyapith, Khamhar, Begusarai.
7. Dr. Ravi Shankar Jha, Son of Late Anand Lal Jha, at present posted as
Principal in Purnima Ram Pratap Sanskrit College, Baigni, Darbhanga.
8. Dr. Ashok Kumar Purbey, Son of Late Gajadhar Purbey, at present posted as
Principal in Sri Jagdamba Sanskrit College, Batho, District Darbhanga.
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. Dr. Ramesh Jha, Son of Late Bachaee Jha, Resident of Village- Hainthiwali,
P.O. - Kothia Via- Jhanjharpur, P.S. Jhanjharpur, District- Madhubani.
2. Dr. Priyambada Kumari Mishra, Wife of Sri Mithilesh Kumar Pandey,
Resident of Village and P.O.- Madhopatti, Karntol, P.S.- Madhopatti,
District- Darbhanga.
3. The State of Bihar, through the Principal Secretary, Human Resources
Development Department (Now Education Department) Bihar, Patna.
4. The Director, Higher Education, Human Resources Development
Department (Now Education Department) Bihar, patna.
5. Kameshwar Singh Darbhanga Sanskrit University, Darbhanga through its
Registrar.
6. The Vice-Chancellor, Kameshwar Singh Darbhanga Sanskrit University,
Darbhanga.
7. The Registrar, Kameshwar Singh Darbhanga Sanskrit University,
Darbhanga.
8. Anil Kumar Ishwar, the then Principal, Govt. Sanskrit College, Kajipur,
Patna.
9. Vinay Kumar Singh, the then Principal, Umesh Sanskrit College Tarauni,
Darbhanga.
10. Abha Kumari, the then Principal, Bharat Mishra Sanskrit College, Chapra.
Patna High Court L.P.A No.1376 of 2019 dt. 19-10-2023
11. Rajendra Prasad Choudhur, the then Principal, R.B. Sanskrit College
Bediban, East Champaran.
12. Kanchanmala Pandit, the then Principal, Madneshwar Nath Sanskrit College
Madneshwar Asthan, Madhubani.
13. Rameshwar Rai, the then Principal, Shri Ram Sanskrit College Biajipur,
Gopalganj.
14. Ashwani Kumar Sharma, the then Principal, D.S.S. College, Rambag Road,
Muzaffarpur.
15. Jitendra Kumar, the then Principal, Brajbhushan Sanskrit College
Kharkhura, Gaya.
16. Suresh Pandey, the then Principal, Raghavendra Sanskrit College, Taretpali,
Patna.
17. Dineshwar Yadav, the then Principal, Madan Sanskrit College, Ishahpur,
Madhubani.
18. Prabhash Chandra, the then Principal, Shiv Prasad Degree College, Rampur,
Umarpur Buxar.
19. Ghanshyam Mishra, the then Principal, M.M. Late Sanskrit College, Lohna,
Madhubani.
20. Hari Narayan Thakur, the then Principal, Ramadhin Mishra, Bhaskaroday
Sanskrit College, Devdhia, Buxar, now retired.
21. Umesh Kumar Singh, the then Principal, Awadh Bihari Sanskrit College,
Rahimpur Khagaria.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
with
Letters Patent Appeal No. 1368 of 2019
In
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.7039 of 2011
======================================================
1. Dr. Dineshwar Yadav, Son of Late Sube Yadav, at present posted as Principal
in Laxmi Narayan Rameshwar Sanskrit College, Jaideo Patti, District-
Darbhanga.
2. Dr. Prabhash Chandra, Son of Late Ram Chandra Mishra, at present posted
as Principal in government of Sanskrit College, Bhagalpur District-
Bhagalpur.
3. Dr. Ghanshyam Mishra, Son of Narayan Dutt Mishra, at present posted as
Principal in Maharani Maheshwar lata Sanskrit Vidya Pith, Lohna District-
Madhubani.
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. Dr. Ramesh Jha, Son of Late Bachaee Jha, Resident of Village- Hainthiwali,
P.O.- Kothia Via- Jhanjharpur, P.S.- Jhanjharpur, District- Madhubani.
2. Dr. Priyambada Kumari Mishra, Wife of Sri Mithilesh Kumar Pandey, R/O
Patna High Court L.P.A No.1376 of 2019 dt. 19-10-2023
Vill. and P.O.-Madhopatti, Karntol, P.S.-Madhopatti, Distt.-Darbhanga.
3. The State of Bihar, through the Principal Secretary, Human Resources
Development Department (Now Education Department) Bihar, Patna.
4. The Director, Higher Education, Human Resources Development
Department (Now Education Department) Bihar, Patna.
5. Kameshwar Singh Darbhanga Sanskrit University, Darbhanga through its
Registrar.
6. The Vice - Chancellor, Kameshwar Singh Darbhanga Sanskrit University,
Darbhanga.
7. The Registrar, Kameshwar Singh Darbhanga Sanskrit University,
Darbhanga.
8. Anil Kumar Ishwar, the then Principal, Govt. Sanskrit College, Kajipur,
Patna.
9. Vinay Kumar Singh, the then Principal, Umesh Sanskrit College Tarauni,
Darbhanga.
10. Abha Kumari, the then Principal, Bharat Mishra Sanskrit College, Chapra.
11. Rajendra Prasad Choudhur, the then Principal, R.B. Sanskrit College
Bediban, East Champran.
12. Kanchanmala Pandit, the then Principal, Madneshwar Nath Sanskrit College
Madneshwar Asthan, Madhubani.
13. Ashok Kumar Purvey, the then Principal, Jagdamba Sanskrit College, Batho,
Darbhanga.
14. Ravi Shankar Jha, the then Principal, Purnima Ram Pratap Sanskrit College
Baigni, Darbhanga.
15. Rameshwar Rai, the then Principal, Shri Ram Sanskrit College Biajipur,
Gopalganj.
16. Ashok Kumar Ajad, the then Principal, Laxmi Narain Sanskrit College,
Jaidev Patti, Darbhanga.
17. Manoj Kumar, the then Principal, B.P. Arya Sanskrit College, Siwan.
18. Bhaglu Jha, the then Principal, Sidheshwari Sanskrit College, Pachrukhia,
Bhojpur.
19. Hari Narayan Thakur, the then Principal, Ramadhin Mishra, Bhaskaroday
Sanskrit College, Devdhia, Buxar, now retired.
20. Prem Kant Jha, the then Principal Ugrata Bharti Mandan Sanskrit College,
Mabishi Saharsa.
21. Ashwani Kumar Sharma, the then Principal, D.S.S. College, Rambag Road,
Muzaffarpur.
22. Jitendra Kumar, the then Principal, Brajbhushan Sanskrit College
Kharkhura, Gaya.
23. Suresh Pandey, the then Principal, Raghavendra Sanskrit College, Taretpali,
Patna.
24. Umesh Kumar Singh, the then Principal, Awadh Bihari Sanskrit College,
Rahimpur Khagaria.
Patna High Court L.P.A No.1376 of 2019 dt. 19-10-2023
25. Shiv Lochan Jha, the then Principal, Kalyani Mithila Sanskrit College, Deep,
Madhubani.
26. Dinesh Jha, the then Principal, Baba Saheb Ram Sanskrit College, Pachadhi,
Darbhanga.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
with
Letters Patent Appeal No. 1399 of 2019
In
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.7039 of 2011
======================================================
Dr. Hari Narayan Thakur, son of Late Vidya Nand Thakur, R/o. Village/
Mohalla- Darbhanga Town, P.S. L.N.M.U. Darbhanga, District Darbhanga,
Principal Ramadhin Mishra Bhaskaroday Sanskrti College, Devdhia, Buxar,
now retired Principal from A.M.P Sanskrit College, Pahua Sangram,
Madhubani.
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. Dr. Ramesh Jha S/o Late Bachaee Jha, R/O Vill.-Hainthibali, P.O.-Kothia,
Via-Jhanjharpur, P.S.-Jhanjharpur, Distt.-Madhubani.
2. Dr. Priyamvada Kumari Mishra, W/o Sh. Mithilesh Kumar Pandey, R/O Vill.
P.O.-Madhopatti, Karntol, P.S.-Madhopatti, Distt.-Darbhanga.
3. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Human Resources
Development Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
4. The Director, Higher Education, Human Resources Development
Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
5. Kameshwar Singh Darbhanga Sanskrit University, Darbhanga through the
Registrar.
6. The Vice-Chancellor, kameshwar Singh Darbhanga Sanskrit University,
Darbhanga.
7. The Registrar, Kameshwar Singh Darbhanga Sanskrit University,
Darbhanga.
8. Anil Kumar Ishwar, Principal, Govt. Sanskrit College, Kajipur, Patna.
9. Vinay Kumar Singh, Principal, Umesh Sanskrit College, Tarauni,
Darbhanga.
10. Ghanshyam Mishra, Principal, Umesh Sanskrit College, Lohna, Madhubani.
11. Abha Kumari, Principal, Bharat Mishra Sanskrit College, Chapra.
12. Rajendra Prasad Choudur, Principal, Madneshwar nath Sanskrit College,
Madneshwar Sthan, Madhubani.
13. Kanchanmala Pandit, Principal, Madneshwar nath Sanskrit College,
Madneshwar Sthan, Madhubani.
14. Ashok Kumar Purvey, Principal, Jagdamba Sanskrit College, Bathe,
Darbhanga.
Patna High Court L.P.A No.1376 of 2019 dt. 19-10-2023
15. Ravi Shankar Jha, Principal Purnima Rampratap Sanskrit College, Bagni,
Darbhanga.
16. Rameshwar Rai, Principal, Shri Ram Sanskrit College, Bijipur, Giopalganj.
17. Dineshwar Yadav, Principal, Nandan Sanskrit College, Ishahpur,
Madhubani.
18. Ashok Kumar Ajad, Principal, Laxminarain Sanskrit College, Jaidevpatti,
Darbhanga.
19. Manoj Kumar, Principal, B.P. Arya Sanskrit College, Siwan.
20. Bhaglu Jha, Principal, Sidheshwai Sanskrit College, Pachrukhia, Bhojpur.
21. Prabhash Chandra, Principal, Shivprasad Degree College, Rampur,
Umarpur, Buxar.
22. Premkant Jha, Principal, Ugratara Bharti Mandan Sanskrit College, Mahishi,
Saharsa.
23. Ashwini Kumar Sharma, Principal, D.S.S., College, Rambagh Road,
Muzaffarpur.
24. Jitendra Kumar, Principal, Brajbhushan Sanskrit College, Taretpali, Patna.
25. Suresh Kumar, Principal, Raghavendra Sanskrit College, Taretpali, Patna.
26. Umesh Kumar Singh, Principal, Awadh Bihari Sanskrit College, Khagaria.
27. Shiv Lochan Jha, Principal, Kalyani Mithila Sanskrit College, Deep,
Madhubanil.
28. Dinesh Jha, Principal, Baba Saheb Ram Sanskrit College, Pachadhi,
Darbhanga.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
with
Letters Patent Appeal No. 1402 of 2019
In
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.7039 of 2011
======================================================
Jitendra Kumar, Son of Bhawani Prasad Singh, Resident of Mohalla- Shivpuri
Colony, Road No.1, Gaya, P.S.- Chandauti, District- Gaya, Principal, Braj
Bhushan Sanskrit College, Kharkhura, Gaya.
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. Dr. Ramesh Jha, S/o Late Bachaee Jha R/O Village - Hainthibali, P.O.-
Kothia, Via-Jhanjharpur, P.S.-Jhanjharpur, Distt.-Madhubani.
2. Dr. Priyambada Kumari Mishra W/o Shri Mithilesh Kumar Pandeya R/O
Village and P.O.-Madhopatti, Karntol, P.S.-Madhopatti, Distt.-Darbhanga.
3. The State of Bihar Through the Principal Secretary, Human Resources
Development Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
4. The Director, Higher Education, Human Resources Development Deptt.,
Bihar, Patna.
Patna High Court L.P.A No.1376 of 2019 dt. 19-10-2023
5. Kameshwar Singh, Darbhanga Sanskrit University, Darbhanga Through Its
Registrar.
6. The Vice-Chancellor, Kameshwar Singh Dabhanga Sanskrit University,
Darbhanga.
7. The Registrar, Kameshwar Singh Darbhanga Sanskrit University,
Darbhanga.
8. Anil Kumar Ishwar, Principal, Govt. Sanskrit College, Kajipur, Patna.
9. Vinay Kumar Singh, Principal, Umesh Sanskrit College, Tarauni,
Darbhanga.
10. Ghanshyam Mishra, Principal, M.M. Lata Sanskrit College, Lohna,
Madhubani.
11. Abha Kumari, Principal, Bharat Mishra Sanskrit College, Chapra.
12. Rajendra Prasad Choudhur, Principal, R.B. Sanskrit College, Bediban, East
Champaran.
13. Kanchanmala Pandit, Principal, Madneshwar Nath Sanskrit College,
Madneshwar Sthan, Madhubani.
14. Ashok Kumar Purvey, Principal, Jagdamba Sanskrit College, Bathe,
Darbhanga.
15. Ravi Shankar Jha, Principal, Purnima Ramratap Sanskrit College, Bagni,
Darbhanga.
16. Rameshwar Rai, Principal, Shri Ram Sanskrit College, Biajipur, Gopalganj.
17. Dineshwar Yadav, Principal, Nandan Sanskrit College, Ishahpur,
Madhubani.
18. Ashok Kumar Ajad, Principal, Laxminarain Sanskrit College, Jaidevpatti,
Darbhanga.
19. Manoj Kumar, Principal, B.P. Arya Sanskrit College, Siwan.
20. Bhaglu Jha, Principal, Sidheshwai Sanskrit College, Pachrukhia, Bhojur.
21. Prabhash Chandra, Principal, Shivprasad Degree College, Rampur,
Umarpur, Buxar.
22. Harinarayan Thakur, Principal, Ramadhin Mishra Bhaskaroday Sanskrit
College, Devdhia, Buxar.
23. Premkant Jha, Principal, Ugratara Bharti Mandan Sanskrit College, Mahishi,
Saharsa.
24. Ashwini Kumar Sharma, Principal, D.S.S., College, Rambagh Road,
Muzaffarpur.
25. Suresh Kumar, Principal, Raghavendra Sanskrit College, Taretpali, Patna.
26. Umesh Kumar Singh, Principal, Awadh Bihari Sanskrit College, Rahimpur,
Khagaria.
27. Shiv Lochan Jha, Principal, Kalyani Mithila Sanskrit College, Deep,
Madhubani.
28. Dinesh Jha, Principal, Baba Saheb Ram Sanskrit College, Pachadhi,
Darbhanga.
Patna High Court L.P.A No.1376 of 2019 dt. 19-10-2023
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
with
Letters Patent Appeal No. 1403 of 2019
In
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.7039 of 2011
======================================================
Rajendra Prasad Choudhur, Son of Late Jagannath Choudhur, Resident of
Mohalla- Sri Krishna Nagar, P.S.- Motihari, Distt.- East Champaran, Posted as
Principal, R.B. Sanskrit College, Bediban, East Champaran
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. Dr. Ramesh Jha S/O Late Bachaee Jha, R/O Village- Hainthibali, P.O.-
Kothia, Via-J hanjharpur, P.S.- Jhanjharpur, Distt.- Madhubani.
2. Dr. Priyambada Kumari Mishra, W/O Shri Mithilesh Kumar Pandeya R/O
Village and P.O.- Madhopatti, Karntol, P.S.- Madhopatti, Distt.- Darbhanga
3. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Human Resources
Development Department, Government of Bihar, Patna
4. The Director, Higher Education, Human Resources Development Deptt.,
(Now Education Department) Bihar, Patna.
5. Kameshwar Singh, Darbhanga Sanskrit University, Darbhanga Through Its
Registrar.
6. The Vice-Chancellor, Kameshwar Singh Dabhanga Sanskrit
University,Darbhanga.
7. The Registrar, Kameshwar Singh Darbhanga Sanskrit University,Darbhanga.
8. Anil Kumar Ishwar, Principal, Govt. Sanskrit College, Kajipur, Patna.
9. Vinay Kumar Singh, Principal, Umesh Sanskrit College, Tarauni, Darbhanga
10. Ghanshyam Mishra, Principal, M.M. Lata Sanskrit College, Lohna,
Madhubani
11. Abha Kumari, Principal, Bharat Mishra Sanskrit College, Chapra
12. Kanchanmala Pandit, Principal, Madneshwar Nath Sanskrit
College,Madneshwar Sthan, Madhubani.
13. Ashok Kumar Purvey, Principal, Jagdamba Sanskrit College,
Bathe,Darbhanga.
14. Ravi Shankar Jha, Principal, Purnima Rampratap Sanskrit College,
Bagni,Darbhanga.
15. Rameshwar Rai, Principal, Shri Ram Sanskrit College, Biajipur, Gopalganj.
16. Dineshwar Yadav, Principal, Nandan Sanskrit College, Ishahpur, Madhubani
17. Ashok Kumar Ajad, Principal, Laxminarain Sanskrit College,
Jaidevpatti,Darbhanga.
18. Manoj Kumar, Principal, B.P. Arya Sanskrit College, Siwan.
Patna High Court L.P.A No.1376 of 2019 dt. 19-10-2023
19. Bhaglu Jha, Principal, Sidheshwai Sanskrit College, Pachrukhia, Bhojpur.
20. Prabhash Chandra, Principal, Shiv Prasad Degree College, Rampur,
Umarpur, Buxar
21. Hari Narayan Thakur, Principal, Ramadhin Mishra, Bhaskaroday Sanskrit
College, Devdhia, Buxar, now retired
22. Premkant Jha, Principal, Ugratara Bharti Mandan Sanskrit College,
Mahishi,Saharsa.
23. Ashwini Kumar Sharma, Principal, D.S.S., College, Rambagh
Road,Muzaffarpur.
24. Jitendra Kumar, Principal, Brajbhushan Sanskrit College, Kharkhura, Gaya.
25. Suresh Kumar, Principal, Raghavendra Sanskrit College, Taretpali, Patna
26. Umesh Kumar Singh, Principal, Awadh Bihari Sanskrit College,
Rahimpur,Khagaria.
27. Shiv Lochan Jha, Principal, Kalyani Mithila Sanskrit College,
Deep,Madhubani.
28. Dinesh Jha, Principal, Baba Saheb Ram Sanskrit College,
Pachadhi,Darbhanga.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
with
Letters Patent Appeal No. 1405 of 2019
In
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.7039 of 2011
======================================================
Ashwini Kumar Sharma, Son of Ram Pavitra Sharma, Resident of Village -
Raghopur, P.S.- Muzaffarpur, District- Muzaffarpur, Principal, D.S.S. College,
Rambagh Road, Muzaffapur.
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. Dr. Ramesh Jha, S/O late Bachaee Jha, Address - R/O Vill.-Hainthibali, P.O.-
Kothia, Via-Jhanjharpur, P.S.-Jhanjharpur, Distt.-Madhubani.
2. Dr. Priyambada Kumari Mishra, W/O Shri Mithilesh Kumar Pandeya, R/O
Vill. P.O.-Madhopatti, Karntol, P.S.-Madhopatti, Distt.-Darbhanga.
3. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Human Resources
Development Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
4. The Director, Higher Education, Human Resources Development Deptt.
Bihar, patna.
5. Kameshwar Singh Darbhanga Sanskrit University, Darbhanga through the
Registrar.
6. The Vice-Chancellor, Kameshwar Singh Darbhanga Sanskrit University,
Darbhanga.
7. The Registrar, Kameshwar Singh Darbhanga Sanskrit University,
Patna High Court L.P.A No.1376 of 2019 dt. 19-10-2023
Darbhanga.
8. Anil Kumar Ishwar, Principal, Govt. Sanskrit College, Kajipur, Patna.
9. Vinay Kumar Singh, Principal, Umesh Sanskrit College, Tarauni,
Darbhanga.
10. Ghanshyam Mishra, Principal, M.M. late Sanskrit College, Lohna,
Madhubani.
11. Abha Kumari, Principal, Bharat Mishra Sanskrit College, Chapra.
12. Rajendra Prasad Choudur, Principal, R.B. Sanskrit College, Bediban, East
Champaran.
13. Kanchanmala Pandit, Principal, Madneshwar nath Sanskrit College,
Madneshwar Sthan, Madhubani.
14. Ashok Kumar Purvey, Principal, Jagdamba Sanskrit College, Bathe,
Darbhanga.
15. Ravi Shankar Jha, Principal Purnima Rampratap Sanskrit College, Bagni,
Darbhanga.
16. Rameshwar Rai, Principal, Shri Ram Sanskrit College, Bijipur, Giopalganj.
17. Dineshwar yadav, Principal, Nandan Sanskrit College, Ishahpur, Madhubani.
18. Ashok Kumar Ajad, Principal, Laxminarain Sanskrit College, Jaidevpatti,
Darbhanga.
19. Manoj Kumar, Principal, B.P. Arya Sanskrit College, Siwan.
20. Bhaglu Jha, Principal, Sidheshwai Sanskrit College, Pachrukhia, Bhojpur.
21. Prabhash Chandra, Principal, Shivprasad Degree College, Rampur,
Umarpur, Buxar.
22. Harinarayan Thakur, Principal, Ramadhin Mishra Bhaskaroday Sanskrit
College, Devhia, Buxar.
23. Premkant Jha, Principal, Ugratara Bharti Mandan Sanskrit College, Mahishi,
Saharsa.
24. Jitendra Kumar, Principal, Braj Bhushan Sanskrit College, Kharkhura, Gaya.
25. Suresh Kumar, Principal, Gaghavendra Sanskrit College, Taretpali, Patna.
26. Umesh Kumar Singh, Principal, Awadh Bihari Sanskrit College, Rahimpur,
Khagaria.
27. Shiv Lochan Jha, Kalyani Mithila Sanskrit College, Deep, Madhubani.
28. Dinesh Jha, Principal, Baba Saheb Ram Sanskrit College, Pachadhi,
Darbhanga.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
with
Letters Patent Appeal No. 1407 of 2019
In
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.7039 of 2011
======================================================
1. Dr. Suresh Pandey, Son of Late Tapeshwar Pandey at present posted as
Patna High Court L.P.A No.1376 of 2019 dt. 19-10-2023
Principal in Sidheshwari Sanskrit Mahavidyalaya, Pachrukhiya, Bhojpur,
P.s.- Hasan Bazar, Bhojpu
2. Vinay Kumar Singh, Son of Late Ram Sevak Singh at present posted as
Principal in Awadh Bihari Sanskrit College, Rahimpur, Khagaria
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. Dr. Ramesh Jha, S/O Late Bachaee Jha, R/O Village- Hainthibali, P.O.-
Kothia, Via-J hanjharpur, P.S.- Jhanjharpur, Distt.- Madhubani.
2. Dr. Priyambada Kumari Mishra, W/O Shri Mithilesh Kumar Pandeya
R/OVillage and P.O.- Madhopatti, Karntol, P.S.- Madhopatti, Distt.-
Darbhanga
3. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Human Resources
Development Department, Government of Bihar, Patna
4. The Director, Higher Education, Human Resources Development Deptt.,
(Now Education Department) Bihar, Patna.
5. Kameshwar Singh Darbhanga Sanskrit University, Darbhanga Through Its
Registrar.
6. The Vice-Chancellor, Kameshwar Singh Dabhanga Sanskrit University,
Darbhanga.
7. The Resistrar, Kameshwar Singh Darbhanga Sanskrit University,Darbhanga.
8. Anil Kumar Ishwar, the then Principal, Govt. Sanskrit College, Kajipur,
Patna.
9. Abha Kumari, the then Principal, Bharat Mishra Sanskrit College, Chapra
10. Rajendra Prasad Choudhur, the then Principal, R.B. Sanskrit College,
Bediban, East Champaran.
11. Kanchanmala Pandit, the then Principal, Madneshwar Nath Sanskrit
College,Madneshwar Sthan, Madhubani.
12. Ashok Kumar Purvey, the then Principal, Jagdamba Sanskrit College,
Bathe,Darbhanga.
13. Ravi Shankar Jha, the then Principal, Purnima Rampratap Sanskrit College,
Bagni,Darbhanga.
14. Rameshwar Rai, the then Principal, Shri Ram Sanskrit College, Biajipur,
Gopalganj.
15. Ashok Kumar Ajad, the then Principal, Laxminarain Sanskrit College,
Jaidevpatti,Darbhanga.
16. Manoj Kumar, the then Principal, B.P. Arya Sanskrit College, Siwan.
17. Bhaglu Jha, the then Principal, Sidheshwai Sanskrit College, Pachrukhia,
Bhojpur.
18. Hari Narayan Thakur, the then Principal, Ramadhin Mishra, Bhaskaroday
Sanskrit College, Devdhia, Buxar, now retired
19. Prem kant Jha, the then Principal, Ugratara Bharti Mandan Sanskrit College,
Mahishi,Saharsa.
Patna High Court L.P.A No.1376 of 2019 dt. 19-10-2023
20. Ashwini Kumar Sharma, the then Principal, D.S.S., College, Rambagh
Road,Muzaffarpur.
21. Jitendra Kumar, the then Principal, Brajbhushan Sanskrit College,
Kharkhura, Gaya.
22. Umesh Kumar Singh, the then Principal, Awadh Bihari Sanskrit College,
Rahimpur,Khagaria.
23. Shiv Lochan Jha, the then Principal, Kalyani Mithila Sanskrit College,
Deep,Madhubani.
24. Dinesh Jha, the then Principal, Baba Saheb Ram Sanskrit College,
Pachadhi,Darbhanga.
25. Dineshwar Yadav, the they Principal, Nandan Sanskrit College, Ishahpur,
Madhubani
26. Prabhash Chandra, the then Principal, Shiv Prasad Degree College, Rampur,
Umarpur, Buxar
27. Ghanshyam Mishra, the then Principal, M.M. Lata Sanskrit College, Lohna,
Madhubani
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
with
Letters Patent Appeal No. 1408 of 2019
In
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.7039 of 2011
======================================================
Anil Kumar Ishwar, Son of Late Ramdeo Ishwar, Resident of Village-
Marachi, P.S.-Bachawara, District-Begusarai, the then Principal, Govt.
Sanskrit College, Kajipur, Patna.
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. Dr. Ramesh Jha S/O Late Bachaee Jha, R/O Village- Hainthibali, P.O.-
Kothia, Via-Jhanjharpur, P.S.- Jhanjharpur, Distt.- Madhubani.
2. Dr. Priyambada Kumari Mishra, W/O Shri Mithilesh Kumar Pandeya , R/O
Village and P.O.- Madhopatti, Karntol, P.S.- Madhopatti, Distt.- Darbhanga.
3. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Human Resources
Development Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
4. The Director, Higher Education, Human Resources Development Deptt.,
Bihar, Patna.
5. Kameshwar Singh Darbhanga Sanskrit University, Darbhanga Through Its
Registrar.
6. The Vice-Chancellor, Kameshwar Singh Dabhanga Sanskrit University,
Darbhanga.
7. The Registrar, Kameshwar Singh Darbhanga Sanskrit University,
Darbhanga.
8. Vinay Kumar Singh, Principal, Umesh Sanskrit College, Tarauni,
Patna High Court L.P.A No.1376 of 2019 dt. 19-10-2023
Darbhanga.
9. Ghanshyam Mishra, Principal, M.M. Lata Sanskrit College, Lohna,
Madhubani
10. Abha Kumari, Principal, Bharat Mishra Sanskrit College, Chapra
11. Rajendra Prasad Choudhur, Principal, R.B. Sanskrit College, Bediban, East
Champaran.
12. Kanchanmala Pandit, Principal, Madneshwar Nath Sanskrit College,
Madneshwar Sthan, Madhubani.
13. Ashok Kumar Purvey, Principal, Jagdamba Sanskrit College, Bathe,
Darbhanga.
14. Ravi Shankar Jha, Principal, Purnima Rampratap Sanskrit College, Bagni,
Darbhanga.
15. Rameshwar Rai, Principal, Shri Ram Sanskrit College, Biajipur, Gopalganj.
16. Dineshwar Yadav, Principal, Nandan Sanskrit College, Ishahpur, Madhubani
17. Ashok Kumar Ajad, Principal, Laxminarain Sanskrit College, Jaidevpatti,
Darbhanga.
18. Manoj Kumar, Principal, B.P. Arya Sanskrit College, Siwan.
19. Bhaglu Jha, Principal, Sidheshwai Sanskrit College, Pachrukhia, Bhojpur.
20. Prabhash Chandra, Principal, Shivprasad Degree College, Rampur,
Umarpur, Buxar.
21. Harinarayan Thakur, Principal, Ramadhin Mishra Bhaskaroday Sanskrit
College, Devdhia, Buxar.
22. Premkant Jha, Principal, Ugratara Bharti Mandan Sanskrit College, Mahishi,
Saharsa.
23. Ashwini Kumar Sharma, Principal, D.S.S. College, Rambagh Road,
Muzaffarpur.
24. Jitendra Kumar, Principal, Braj Bhushan Sanskrit College, Kharkhura, Gaya.
25. Suresh Kumar, Principal, Raghavendra Sanskrit College, Taretpali, Patna
26. Umesh Kumar Singh, Principal, Awadh Bihari Sanskrit College, Rahimpur,
Khagaria.
27. Shiv Lochan Jha, Principal, Kalyani Mithila Sanskrit College, Deep,
Madhubani.
28. Dinesh Jha, Principal, Baba Saheb Ram Sanskrit College, Pachadhi,
Darbhanga.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
with
Letters Patent Appeal No. 1412 of 2019
In
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.7039 of 2011
======================================================
Patna High Court L.P.A No.1376 of 2019 dt. 19-10-2023
Abha Kumari, Wife of Sri Subodh Kumar Resident of Village- Tarsan, P.S.-
Kurhani, District- Muzaffarpur, Principal, Bharat Mishra Sanskrit College,
Chhapra.
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. Dr. Ramesh Jha S/o Late Bachaee Jha R/O Village -Hainthibali, P.O.-Kothia,
Via-Jhanjharpur, P.S.-Jhanjharpur, Distt.-Madhubani.
2. Dr. Priyambada Kumari Mishra W/o Shri Mithilesh Kumar Pandeya R/O
Village and P.O.-Madhopatti, Karntol, P.S.-Madhopatti, Distt.-Darbhanga.
3. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Human Resources
Development Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
4. The Director, Higher Education, Human Resources Development Deptt.,
Bihar, Patna.
5. Kameshwar Singh, Darbhanga Sanskrit University, Darbhanga Through Its
Registrar.
6. The Vice-Chancellor, Kameshwar Singh Dabhanga Sanskrit University,
Darbhanga.
7. The Registrar, Kameshwar Singh Darbhanga Sanskrit University,
Darbhanga.
8. Vinay Kumar Singh, Principal, Umesh Sanskrit College, Tarauni,
Darbhanga.
9. Ghanshyam Mishra, Principal, M.M. Lata Sanskrit College, Lohna,
Madhubani.
10. Anil Ishwar, Principal, Govt. Sanskrit College, Kajipur, Patna.
11. Rajendra Prasad Choudhur, Principal, R.B. Sanskrit College, Bediban, East
Champaran.
12. Kanchanmala Pandit, Principal, Madneshwar Nath Sanskrit College,
Madneshwar Sthan, Madhubani.
13. Ashok Kumar Purvey, Principal, Jagdamba Sanskrit College, Bathe,
Darbhanga.
14. Ravi Shankar Jha, Principal, Purnima Ramratap Sanskrit College, Bagni,
Darbhanga.
15. Rameshwar Rai, Principal, Shri Ram Sanskrit College, Biajipur, Gopalganj.
16. Dineshwar Yadav, Principal, Nandan Sanskrit College, Ishahpur,
Madhubani.
17. Ashok Kumar Ajad, Principal, Laxminarain Sanskrit College, Jaidevpatti,
Darbhanga.
18. Manoj Kumar, Principal, B.P. Arya Sanskrit College, Siwan.
19. Bhaglu Jha, Principal, Sidheshwai Sanskrit College, Pachrukhia, Bhojpur.
20. Prabhash Chandra, Principal, Shivprasad Degree College, Rampur,
Umarpur, Buxar.
21. Harinarayan Thakur, Principal, Ramadhin Mishra Bhaskaroday Sanskrit
Patna High Court L.P.A No.1376 of 2019 dt. 19-10-2023
College, Devdhia, Buxar.
22. Premkant Jha, Principal, Ugratara Bharti Mandan Sanskrit College, Mahishi,
Saharsa.
23. Ashwini Kumar Sharma, Principal, D.S.S., College, Rambagh Road,
Muzaffarpur.
24. Jitendra Kumar, Principal, Raghavendra Sanskrit College, Kharkhura, Gaya.
25. Suresh Kumar, Principal, Raghavendra Sanskrit College, Taretpali, Patna.
26. Umesh Kumar Singh, Principal, Awadh Bihari Sanskrit College, Rahimpur,
Khagaria.
27. Shiv Lochan Jha, Principal, Kalyani Mithila Sanskrit College, Deep,
Madhubani.
28. Dinesh Jha, Principal, Baba Saheb Ram Sanskrit College, Pachadhi,
Darbhanga.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
(In Letters Patent Appeal No. 1376 of 2019)
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Y.V.Giri, Sr. Advocate
Mr. Durga Nand Jha, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Apurva Kumar, Advocate
For the University : Mr. Sanjay Singh, Sr. Advocate
Mr. Deepak Kumar, Advocate
(In Letters Patent Appeal No. 1368 of 2019)
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Y.V.Giri, Sr. Advocate
Mr. Durga Nand Jha, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Apurva Kumar, Advocate
For the University : Mr. Sanjay Singh, Sr. Advocate
Mr. Deepak Kumar, Advocate
(In Letters Patent Appeal No. 1399 of 2019)
For the Appellant/s : Mrs. Namrata Mishra, Advocate
Mr. Chotelal Mishra,Advocate
Mrs. Archana Jha, Advocate
Mr. Narayan Jha, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Apurva Kumar, Advocate
For the University : Mr. Sanjay Singh, Sr. Advocate
Mr. Deepak Kumar, Advocate
(In Letters Patent Appeal No. 1402 of 2019)
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Jitendra Singh, Sr. Advocate
Mr. Arun Kumar, Advocate
Mr. Raghubir Chandraya, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Apurva Kumar, Advocate
For the University : Mr. Sanjay Singh, Sr. Advocate
Mr. Deepak Kumar, Advocate
(In Letters Patent Appeal No. 1403 of 2019)
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Jitendra Singh, Sr. Advocate
Mr. Arun Kumar, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Apurva Kumar, Advocate
For the University : Mr. Sanjay Singh, Sr. Advocate
Mr. Deepak Kumar, Advocate
(In Letters Patent Appeal No. 1405 of 2019)
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Jitendra Singh, Sr. Advocate
Patna High Court L.P.A No.1376 of 2019 dt. 19-10-2023
Mr. Arun Kumar, Advocate
Mr. Raghubir Chandraya, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Apurva Kumar, Advocate
For the University : Mr. Sanjay Singh, Sr. Advocate
Mr. Deepak Kumar, Advocate
(In Letters Patent Appeal No. 1407 of 2019)
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Durga Nand Jha, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Apurva Kumar, Advocate
For the University : Mr. Sanjay Singh, Sr. Advocate
Mr. Deepak Kumar, Advocate
(In Letters Patent Appeal No. 1408 of 2019)
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Jitendra Singh, Sr. Advocate
Mr. Arun Kumar, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Apurva Kumar, Advocate
For the University : Mr. Sanjay Singh, Sr. Advocate
Mr. Deepak Kumar, Advocate
(In Letters Patent Appeal No. 1412 of 2019)
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Pushkar Narain Shahi, Sr. Advocate
Mr. Alok Kumar @ Alok Kr Shahi, Advocate
Mr. Shivam, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Apurva Kumar, Advocate
For the University : Mr. Sanjay Singh, Sr. Advocate
Mr. Deepak Kumar, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY
CAV JUDGMENT
(Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE)
Date : 19-10-2023
The appellants, in the various appeals, selected
and appointed as Principals in the several colleges affiliated to
the 5th Respondent; which is a Sanskrit University, are aggrieved
with the judgment dated 24.09.2019 of the learned Single Judge,
which set aside the entire selection to the post of Principals
carried out by the University. The Respondent Nos. 1 and 2
were the writ petitioners; the first of whom is no more and the
second petitioner is not represented in the appeal despite notice
having been served. There was a substitution application filed
Patna High Court L.P.A No.1376 of 2019 dt. 19-10-2023
on behalf of the 1st respondent. By order No. 10, dated
02.01.2023, a Division Bench has found the same to be
unnecessary, especially since the deceased was one of the
candidates, who appeared for the selection; whose claim was for
selection in preference to the others; allegedly going by his
merit, which claim does not survive after his death.
2. An intervenor had appeared before the learned
Single Judge, which application, however, was not allowed,
despite the impugned judgment containing observations about
the intervenor's grievances. The intervenor again filed I.A. No.
3 of 2020 in one of the appeals, which was rejected by order
dated 30.01.2023 by another Division Bench. Hence, insofar as
the 1st respondent is concerned, the matter stands abated and
insofar as the intervenor is concerned, he is no longer a party to
the proceeding. Notice was served on the 2nd respondent, which
was recorded as early as on 13.01.2020 in the present appeal,
who is not represented before us. We notice these facts
elaborately only since there is no serious opposition to the
challenge raised against the impugned judgment. The University
is non-committal and offers assistance only insofar as putting
the matter in the right perspective, neither supporting the
appellants nor the writ petitioners/ respondent Nos. 1 & 2.
Patna High Court L.P.A No.1376 of 2019 dt. 19-10-2023
3. We heard learned Senior Counsel Shri Y.V.
Giri, Shri Jitendra Kumar Singh & Shri P.N. Shahi and learned
counsel Smt. Namrata Mishra, appearing in the different
appeals, for the appellants. We heard Shri Sanjay Singh, learned
Senior Counsel for the University and Shri Apurva Kumar, the
learned Government Advocate.
4. The appellants urge that the selection
conducted in the year 2009, in which the writ petitioners also
participated, was challenged after almost two years. The
appellants were issued with appointment letters on 18.05.2009;
while the writ petition was filed on 20.04.2011. The specific
contention taken in the writ petition is that it was informed to
the writ petitioners that the Selection Committee was not
constituted as per the Bihar State Universities Act, 1976 and the
Statute thereunder; specifically, the provisions introduced as per
the Amendment of 2007. However, nothing is stated as to the
time of such knowledge or the source from which the
information originated. On the aspect of delay, reliance is placed
on Mohd. Siddiq Ali v. High Court of A.P; (2005) 13 SCC 207.
The writ petitioners are candidates who participated in the
selection and having failed to be selected, challenged the
selection on the ground of illegality in the constitution of the
Patna High Court L.P.A No.1376 of 2019 dt. 19-10-2023
Selection Committee. Such challenge made to a selection, as an
afterthought, on being unsuccessful, on grounds which could
have been raised prior to the selection, have been deprecated by
the courts time and again. Reliance is placed on Dr. G. Sarana
v. University of Lucknow & Ors., (1976) 3 SCC 585 and
Ramesh Chandra Shah & Ors. v. Anil Joshi & Ors.; (2013) 11
SCC 309.
5. It is pointed out that three main challenges
were raised before the learned Single Judge in the writ petition;
(i) the constitution of the Selection Committee being not in
accordance with the University Act & Statutes, (ii) the high
marks given in the interview to certain candidates, clearly
indicating nepotism and (iii) many of the respondents, though
having teaching experience, there was no remuneration received
by them.
6. It was specifically argued that the Selection
Committee was constituted from the panel of experts, proposed
by the Academic Council. The ground that the experts were
sourced from those proposed for selection of Professors and not
Principals, cannot be sustained since the definition of Teachers
included Principals also. The Selection Committed is asserted to
have been constituted properly and there can be no infirmity
Patna High Court L.P.A No.1376 of 2019 dt. 19-10-2023
found on that ground. Insofar as the marks in the interview,
merely because some persons were given higher marks, there
can be no allegation of nepotism; especially when the marks
awarded were within the total, set apart for the interview. There
was a committee of persons interviewing the candidates, who
individually awarded marks, the average of which was taken to
rank the candidates. None of the Selection Committee members
were impleaded in their personal capacity, which was necessary
to sustain an allegation of nepotism; in effect an accusation of
bias, a clear mala fide action insofar as the selection conducted.
The constitution of the Selection Committee is as per the Act
and statutes is the contention advanced.
7. As far as the teaching experience is concerned,
there is nothing in the advertisement to indicate that the
selection should be from persons who were having experience
in aided colleges; which seems to be the contention raised of
service having been rendered in unaided Colleges.
8. From the impugned judgment, the report of a
High Level Committee is pointed out, which has been wholly
extracted, which, according to the appellants, were never put to
them, before the matter was heard or finally decided. In fact,
order No. 32 dated 06.02.2019 specifically indicates that the
Patna High Court L.P.A No.1376 of 2019 dt. 19-10-2023
report handed over by the University, across the Bar in a sealed
cover, was perused and returned on the same day. It is not clear
how the entire report was extracted in the impugned judgment
when the same was returned after perusal. The learned Single
Judge after referring to the report in its entirety; which found the
selection of all the appellants, except three persons, to be
perfectly in order, rejected it as one obtained for the purpose of
the benefit of the Legislative Council. It is pointed out that the
report specifically speaks of an order of the learned Single
Judge, based on which the High Level Committee was
constituted. The learned Single Judge, according to the
appellants, had misdirected himself insofar as extracting the
High Level Committee's report, which was never supplied to
any of the appellants who were respondents in the writ petition.
9. It is also urged that the learned Single Judge;
as discernible from the various orders including the impugned
one, gave time to the University to appoint the 1 st petitioner and
the intervenor so as to bring a quietus to the litigation. It was
only on the University having not conceded to such
appointments being made, that the very selection itself was set
aside. The learned Single Judge had failed to consider the issue
in the proper perspective and had misdirected himself in setting
Patna High Court L.P.A No.1376 of 2019 dt. 19-10-2023
aside the selection, more as a vindictive & punitive action
against the University, who had despite exploring ways and
means to settle the matter had not enabled such settlement by
appointing the 1st petitioner and the intervenor, as suggested by
the Court.
10. The learned Single Judge in the impugned
judgment referred to the advertisement and also to the
qualifications required for selection to the post of Principal. The
learned Single Judge had noticed the constitution of the High
Level Committee, comprising of Professors from outside the
State, which had gone into the selection made by the University.
Having extracted the report in its entirety, the learned Single
Judge found the report to be not conclusive material on which
reliance could be placed; especially finding it to be a report for
the benefit of the Legislative Council. Immediately, we have to
notice that there is a specific reference in the report itself to the
Committee having been appointed on the basis of the directions
of the High Court and there is no reference to any directions
issued by the Legislative Council.
11. We find from the records of the case that by
order dated 04.09.2018, the learned Single Judge prima facie
found that there were infirmities in the selection. But
Patna High Court L.P.A No.1376 of 2019 dt. 19-10-2023
considering the hardship of the respondents, especially their loss
of lien in the previous employment and some of them having
already retired from the post of Principal, the University was
given time to balance the equity situation so as to mitigate the
injustice allegedly done to the 1st petitioner and the intervenor. It
was also directed that if the University is not able to
accommodate the 1st petitioner and the intervenor; then the
University should adopt the same yardstick on which the 1 st
petitioner and the intervenor were disqualified for reason of
having not completed ten years of teaching experience as on the
cut-off date and come out with a fresh selection list. The
University was granted four weeks' time to come out with such
corrective measures.
12. It is the case of the University that the High
Level Committee was appointed on the basis of directions
issued by the learned Single Judge. On 03.10.2018, it was
recorded that after repeated indulgence, the respondent
University has not rectified the mistakes and adopted corrective
measures. It was observed that the University is now taking the
plea that the University has no jurisdiction to adopt corrective
measures. The selection process of 2008 was asserted to be as
per the then existing norms and there could be nothing done, on
Patna High Court L.P.A No.1376 of 2019 dt. 19-10-2023
the factual and legal situation existing at the time of hearing of
the writ petition. The parties were granted time to file written
note of arguments and the University again was directed to take
corrective measures, if so desired, so as to avoid fixing of
accountability on the erring authorities of the University, both
erstwhile and current. It was based on this order that the High
Level Committee was constituted, as is evident from the report
itself.
13. On 06.02.2019, the learned Single Judge
specifically took note of the recommendations made by the
High Level Committee in its report and again directed that the
1st petitioner and the intervenor may be accommodated against
the vacancies available due to retirement. The report of the High
Level Committee, produced in sealed cover, was returned to the
counsel appearing on behalf of the University, as is seen from
the order itself. Obviously, neither the report was supplied to
the respondents nor any explanation sought for, from them. The
non-supply of the report and the absence of an opportunity to
controvert the adverse findings thereat, definitely constitutes a
gross violation of the principles of natural justice. However, we
cannot but notice that the learned Single Judge had not
proceeded on the basis of the report of the High Level
Patna High Court L.P.A No.1376 of 2019 dt. 19-10-2023
Committee; but it was the refusal of the University to
accommodate the two un-successful candidates that led to the
selections being set aside, as we notice from the order itself.
14. We cannot but observe that now the
appellants cannot have a grievance that the High Level
Committee recommendations cannot be looked into, especially
since the entire extract was available in the impugned order and
they cannot now raise a contention that they had no notice of the
recommendations made. We would have expected the appellants
to explain the objections against any of them in the appeal itself.
Be that as it may, we should first deal with the grounds on
which the learned Single Judge set aside the selection.
15. The contention raised by the appellants
before the learned Single Judge was also that, having appeared
in the selection, they could not have challenged the procedure. It
was noticed that the challenge was on the illegality in the
constitution of the Selection Committee. The members of the
Selection Committee were not drawn from the list approved by
the Academic Council, which goes to the root of the matter, thus
vitiating the very selection. The judgments, relied on by the
respondents, were found to be inapplicable finding one of them
to be on the question of maintainability of a public interest
Patna High Court L.P.A No.1376 of 2019 dt. 19-10-2023
litigation in service matters and the other, insofar as expiry of
lien by the time the challenge was raised. The expiry of lien,
according to the learned Single Judge, would not confer any
equity on the respondents, who were all along aware of the
challenge made and never attempted to revert to their earlier
employment by enforcing their lien. They had liberty to resume
their earlier employment, exercising the lien, but they willingly
continued in the present position was the finding of the learned
Single Judge. The entire selection process was found to be
vitiated for non-adherence of the mandatory provision of
selection contemplated under the University Act and Statutes, to
get over which, no plea of equity can be raised. The selection
was also found to be in clear violation of Articles 14 and 16 of
the Constitution of India.
16. The learned Single Judge had also referred to
the attempts made on behalf of the University to first
substantiate the selection of the expert committee and then for
settlement of the entire issue, in both of which attempts, the
University, according to the learned Single Judge, failed. The
plea of the 1st petitioner and the intervenor, specifically noticed,
was only to obtain accommodation in the University and not to
extract their pound of flesh; meaning thereby that they never
Patna High Court L.P.A No.1376 of 2019 dt. 19-10-2023
intended expulsion of the respondents who were selected in the
process. It was observed that for nearly one year, the court was
waiting for a quietus to the issue, but, now, was constrained to
set aside the selection.
17. At the outset, we have to notice that we
cannot subscribe to the tenor of the observations made in the
impugned judgment so as to continue illegal appointments by
way of giving appointments to those persons, who challenged
the selection. This would not be a justification to uphold a
selection found to be vitiated under Articles 14 and 16 of the
Constitution. We also observe that the 2 nd petitioner has not
appeared since, obviously, she does not have the required
teaching experience, The 1st petitioner was disqualified for not
having required experience in teaching and the intervenor for
not having figured high in the merit list. The Principals are
appointed to colleges imparting education to the students; an
onerous responsibility and duty having wide ramifications. The
appointments are also made to public office, the challenge to
which cannot be settled on mere accommodation of the
petitioners, which by itself would be a gross illegality, which
cannot be resorted to by constitutional courts. We are hence
looking at the selection itself and also the report of the High
Patna High Court L.P.A No.1376 of 2019 dt. 19-10-2023
Level Committee, constituted by the University for the purpose
of exploring corrective measures, as suggested by the Court.
18. Before we look at the validity of the selection
process and the eligibility of the various respondents, we have
to look at the credentials of the petitioners to challenge the
selection process; having participated in it but failed to qualify.
It is also very pertinent that the selection was carried out in the
year 2009 and the writ petition was filed in the year 2011, after
almost two years. The averment in the writ petition indicates
that the petitioners were made aware of the constitution of the
Selection Committee being not in accordance with the Act and
the Statute. However, neither the source of such information nor
the time when such information was conveyed to them, stated
explicitly. It is also to be noticed that the first petitioner was
disqualified for reason of his experience not being adequate.
There is nothing stated in the memorandum of writ petition or
the subsequent affidavits filed by the first petitioner regarding
the satisfaction of the essential experience required as per the
notification.
19. In so far as the credentials of the second
petitioner, it has been specifically stated in the counter affidavit
dated 24.07.2017 filed in the writ petition on behalf of private
Patna High Court L.P.A No.1376 of 2019 dt. 19-10-2023
respondent Nos. 7,10, 23 and 24 that the second petitioner who
was at the time of her application appointed as a Lecturer in
Ganesh Giriwardhari Sanskrit College, Bakhtiyarpur, an
affiliated College under the same University, was sent out by
communication dated 14.12.2011 for having not possessed the
requisite qualification to be appointed to the said post. She is
said to have been removed from service vide resolution dated
10.01.2012 of the University. Further, it is also stated that in the
selection process she received only 56 marks when the cut off
marks for General Category Candidates was 80. Her
performance at the interview was also dismal in comparison to
the other candidates in so far as she had obtained only 13 out of
the 20 marks. Her expulsion from the entire employment
presumably, could be the reason for her non-appearance in the
appeal, she has been found to be not qualified to be appointed to
the earlier teaching assignment, she gets automatically
disqualified herein since it is that former assignment, she
reckons for her experience in the instant selection.
20. The second petitioner also has not
controverted the specific allegations made in the
aforementioned counter affidavit and in that circumstance, she
also has to be considered to be disqualified for consideration in
Patna High Court L.P.A No.1376 of 2019 dt. 19-10-2023
the selection and in any event, she was considered and she failed
short of the minimum standards required for selection. Hence,
both the petitioners are found to be ineligible for consideration
in the selection, since one of them had failed in the selection and
the other had not been given any marks in the interview since he
did not satisfy the minimum required experience.
21. In so far as the intervenor is concerned, he
slept over the matter for a longer time. I.A. No. 899 of 2018 was
filed on 01.02.2018, almost a decade after the selection;
asserting his preferential eligibility to be selected and doubting
the credentials of the persons who were selected. Admittedly,
the intervenor also did not fare well in the selection and failed to
keep the standard for coming higher up in the merit-list. He had
not challenged the selection process and his intervening
application had been dismissed by the Division Bench.
22. As we noticed at the outset, neither the writ-
petitioners nor the intervenor is represented before us. However,
that does not restrain us from looking into the issue since the
appointment is to the post of Principals to Sanskrit Colleges and
the appointment is also to public posts. Infringement of a
statutory provision or violation of the fundamental rights
guaranteed under Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India
Patna High Court L.P.A No.1376 of 2019 dt. 19-10-2023
would definitely enable this Court to invoke its extraordinary
jurisdiction, though the appellants do not have a worthy
adversary to contest the matter. Be that as it may, we cannot but
reiterate our disagreement, with the tenor in which the
impugned judgment proceeds; at first attempting to settle the
entire matter by giving appointment to the first petitioner and
the intervenor, which would be frustration of the principles
governing a valid selection process; the validity of which had to
be examined prior to such mitigation being offered. There were
many who had appeared for the selection and it would not be
proper for the Constitutional Court to shut its eyes to clear
illegalities by pacifying the persons who challenged the
selection by offering them appointments; which they would not
have been entitled to, if they had been competing with other
similarly placed persons in a properly instituted selection. The
impugned judgment also expresses displeasure in the University
having not complied with the attempt, which would have
brought a quietus to the litigation, which was one of the reasons
for setting aside the selection process.
23. Now, we look at the advertisement and the
essential qualification required therein. From the extract of the
advertisement made in the impugned judgment, we notice the
Patna High Court L.P.A No.1376 of 2019 dt. 19-10-2023
qualifications required for the Principal, which is as below:-
What assumes relevance from the above extract is the reference
to 'Traditional Subjects', which we would deal with later.
Suffice it to now notice that, the contention of two of the
appellants, who had Masters Degree in English & Hindi, that
they are 'Traditional Subjects' and as per the decision of this
Court in Dr. (Mrs.) Annapurna Devi Vs. The State of Bihar;
1997(1) PLJR 965 and Arbind Kumar Pandey Vs. Kameshwar
Singh Darbhanga Sanskrit University, Kameshwar Nagar,
Darbhanga; 2003(1) PLJR 282, a Principal in a college can be
a person having the required degree in any subject taught at the
college. We cannot but notice, immediately, that the notification
in the present case, calling for applications to the post of
Principals in the Sanskrit Colleges required qualification in
Acharya or Masters Degree in Traditional Subjects.
Patna High Court L.P.A No.1376 of 2019 dt. 19-10-2023
24. The first challenge is on the Selection
Committee having not been constituted in accordance with the
University Act. The specific objection is raised in the writ
petition at para-8. It is stated that the provisions under Section
57(1) of the Act was not adhered to and that it is not in
compliance with the statute framed under Section 57B of the
Act, which also provides for constitution of the Selection
Committee for appointment against the post of Principal. The
learned Single Judge has found that the appointment of the
Selection Committee was made from the panel of experts
proffered for the purpose of selection to the post of Professor.
Section 57 of the Bihar State Universities Act, as it stood at the
time of selection, has the nominal heading 'appointments of
teachers and officers'. Section 57, as brought in by the Bihar
State Universities (Amendment) Act, 2007, substituting the
earlier provision by which selection was to be conducted by the
Bihar State Universities (Constituent Colleges) Service
Commission. By the amendment, the elaborate procedure
prescribed by Section 57 was substituted with a provision
regulating the constitution of the Selection Committee which
had to make recommendations and provided a quorum for its
meetings. Section 57(1) read with the Statute requires three
Patna High Court L.P.A No.1376 of 2019 dt. 19-10-2023
experts, not connected with the University, to be nominated by
the Vice-Chancellor from a panel of not less than seven names
approved by the Academic Council for each post of which at
least one member should belong to SC/ST and two from outside
the State. This was further amended, requiring the nomination to
be from the ten names approved by the Academic Council.
25. The University in its counter affidavit dated
08.04.2016 filed in the writ petition had specifically averred that
the Selection Committee was constituted in accordance with
Section 57. The objection of the petitioners was also with
respect to the three Experts having not been recommended by
the Academic Council. The counter affidavit specifically points
out that as per the earlier provision, the Academic Council had
approved seven names by its meeting dated 07.12.2007 and later
on amendment of the Statute, further three Experts were also
approved by the Academic Council in its meeting dated
13.12.2008. The three Experts who were appointed have been
named in the supplementary counter affidavit dated 04.09.2018
filed on behalf of the Respondent Nos. 7,10,23 and 24. They
were Professor Kumar Raman Jha, Dr. Birsa Hans, both of
whom were approved by the Academic Council as per
Annexure-A, produced along with the counter affidavit of the
Patna High Court L.P.A No.1376 of 2019 dt. 19-10-2023
University dated 08.04.2016, at its meeting dated 07.12.2007.
The third Expert is one Dr. Indrasen Singh, who was nominated
by the Vice Chancellor as delegated by the Academic Council in
its meeting dated 13.12.2008.
26. The Interview Committee also consisted of
the Vice Chancellor as the Chairman, Professor Binod Kumar
Singh, the Chancellor's nominee, Director of Primary
Education, the Government nominee, Professor Radha Kant
Mishra, senior most Principal/Head of the Department and the
three Experts above referred. As far as the three Experts are
concerned, they are not connected with the University, all of
them being from outside the State and one of them is a member
of the Scheduled Tribe, as is required under Clause (4) of
Section 57 introduced by the Amendment Act of 2007. In the
context of the constitution of the Selection Committee which
has been specifically placed on record, we do not find any
statutory infirmity in its constitution and all of the Experts are
approved by the Academic Council.
27. We have to accept the contention of the
University that the experts appointed for the purpose of
appointment of Professors, includes a Principal, as is seen from
the definition of teachers, under Clause 2(v) of the Bihar State
Patna High Court L.P.A No.1376 of 2019 dt. 19-10-2023
Universities Act, 1976, as it existed in the year 2008. It is also
pointed out that later the definition of teacher was changed,
omitting Principals, but again Principal was included by
amendments brought in later. By an amendment Act of 2012
'Principal' was removed from the definition of 'Teacher' but
later in 2017, again the word 'Principal' was included in that
definition. It was also held in Dr. Raj Kumar Majumdar Vs.
The State of Bihar; 2021(6) BLJ 129, that Principals always
remained under the category of Teacher. We cannot find any
infirmity in the Constitution of the Selection Committee
wherein the subject experts approved by the Academic Council
for selection of Professors, were nominated for selection of
Principals.
28. Now, we have to look at the chart produced
in the supplementary counter affidavit filed on behalf of the
respondent Nos. 7, 10, 23 and 24, which was projected by the
writ petitioner before the learned Single Judge, to be the ground
on which nepotism in interview was pointed out. The total
marks in the procedure for selection was 100, the break-up of
which is provided in the counter affidavit dated 08.04.2016 filed
by the Respondent Nos. 3 to 5, in the writ petition. For
academic performance 71 marks was set apart and for articles 9
Patna High Court L.P.A No.1376 of 2019 dt. 19-10-2023
marks and 20 marks for interview.
29. In so far as the marks awarded at the
interview, one has to look at the supplementary counter affidavit
dated 04.09.2018 filed on behalf of Respondent Nos. 7, 10, 23
and 24. Annexure R/A is the chart in which marks were
awarded. We do not find even one candidate having been
awarded with 20 marks but, however, there are persons who
have been awarded with higher marks even up to 19 which by
itself cannot lead to substantiation of the allegation of nepotism.
We cannot find any illegality in the constitution of the Selection
Committee as also the award of marks by the Selection
Committee. Each of the Selection Committee members awarded
separate marks, the average of which was taken. The quorum
required of five with two a minimum of the experts also was
maintained.
30. Now, we come to the question of
disqualification alleged against some of the respondents who
were impleaded as Respondent Nos. 6 to 27 in the writ petition.
In this context, the report of the High Level Committee is very
relevant. The report has been rejected in the impugned judgment
as inconclusive since it was for the benefit of the Legislative
Council. We are unable to countenance the above, especially
Patna High Court L.P.A No.1376 of 2019 dt. 19-10-2023
looking at the report itself which speaks of the High Level
Committee having been constituted by the University by reason
of the orders issued by this Court on 03.10.2018. The report
before the Legislative Council was the one filed along with I.A.
No. 899 of 2018 as Annexure-E, which has not been referred to
in the impugned judgment.
31. The extracted report is of the High Level
Committee appointed by the University which has been
specifically referred to in the counter affidavit dated 10.10.2018
filed on behalf of Respondent Nos. 3 to 5, the official
respondents. The Vice Chancellor's communication placed
before the Chancellor pursuant to the report submitted before
the Legislative Council, produced as Annexure-E in I.A. No.
899 of 2018, is referred to as Annexure-F produced in the very
same I.A. Despite that the Vice Chancellor by communication
dated 05.10.2018 produced as Annexure-B along with the cited
counter affidavit sought for appropriate orders on the issue,
from the Chancellor, specifically in deference to the orders
passed by the Writ Court to take corrective measures. Annexure-
C is the communication dated 09.10.2018 of the Chancellor
authorizing the Vice Chancellor to examine the allegations and
take necessary action. The Vice Chancellor of the University by
Patna High Court L.P.A No.1376 of 2019 dt. 19-10-2023
notification dated 09.10.2018 constituted a High Level
Committee consisting of an ex-Vice Chancellor, and two
Professors, one from New Delhi and the other from Lucknow.
The notification is produced as Annexure-D and the terms of
reference are also explicit from the same which specifically
refers to CWJC No. 7039 of 2011. The High Level Committee
was definitely constituted; though not directly in compliance
with the orders of this Court, in pursuance of the orders of the
Writ Court commanding the University to take corrective
measures.
32. We have noticed the contention of the
appellants that they were never put to notice of the report of the
High Level Committee; which we also found to be true from the
records of the case. However, the report has been extracted
wholly in the impugned judgment and none of the appellants
can claim that they were not put to notice of the report of the
Expert Committee; at least before the appeal was instituted. In
the above circumstances especially, since we have found the
Selection Committee to be properly constituted and the selection
also not vitiated on the allegations raised, we have to look at the
exercise carried out by the High Level Committee.
33. The High Level Committee appointed by the
Patna High Court L.P.A No.1376 of 2019 dt. 19-10-2023
respondent-University to explore the corrective measures,
suggested by the writ court, consisted of an Ex-Vice Chancellor
and two Professors of Sanskrit University, all of whom were
from outside the State. They perused the report of the Bihar
Legislative Council and also conducted interview of the 22
Principals appointed, as also obtained relevant information
regarding them. Except Dr. Anil Kumar Ishwar, who did not
appear, all the Principals were interviewed again The
Committee noticed irregularities insofar as some of the
Principals having been attached to unaided colleges. The
remuneration was also minimal and hence, the Committee
raised a suspicion as to whether they were appointed namesake
or whether they were actually carrying on teaching work.
However, the Committee, after considering the entire aspects,
arrived at a finding that all the Principals appointed, except
three of them, fulfilled the mandatory qualifications mentioned
in the advertisement. Considering the nine years' service they
had in the respondent-University as Principal and also the
expiry of lien in their former employment, the Committee
opined that they could be continued, except the three specified
persons. It was also found that certain persons were not given
any marks in the interview on the ground that they were not fit
Patna High Court L.P.A No.1376 of 2019 dt. 19-10-2023
as per the administrative point of view. One of such persons was
the 1st petitioner, who had a good merit score of 71 marks. It
was found by the High Level Committee that administrative
experience was not a requirement in the advertisement. It was
also found that the intervenor was given only four marks in the
interview whereas the persons working without salary were
awarded higher marks, which was found to be an irregularity.
34. We are of the opinion that there can be no
irregularity found in the award of marks, especially since even
the experts appointed in the original interview committee gave
almost the same marks as others. We have perused the list of
marks as produced in the counter affidavit, referred to earlier,
which does not show any gross disparity in the marks awarded
by the different members for a particular candidate. It is also to
be observed that merely because the teaching experience was in
unaided colleges, there cannot be a disqualification visited on
anyone, especially since teaching experience in aided college
was not a requirement. The assumption that they could have
been namesake teachers, cannot be sustained in the context of
no further inquiry having been conducted on those lines.
35. As far as the disqualification of certain
candidates as unfit for reasons of no administrative experience,
Patna High Court L.P.A No.1376 of 2019 dt. 19-10-2023
we agree with the High Level Committee that it was not a
requirement. But in considering persons to the post of Principal,
if the Selection Committee considered it a necessary
requirement, they could have assessed the candidates on that
count too, but could not have totally excluded them. The 1 st
petitioner's disqualification was irregular and the Committee
also notices that he had ten years of teaching experience as on
the date of interview. In any event, we would not tarry much on
the 1st petitioner's qualification since he is no more.
36. As far as the intervenor is concerned, we
cannot agree with the Committee that the award of lesser marks,
while awarding higher marks to those in unaided colleges, was
an irregularity; especially since the Committee already found
that there was no requirement for teaching experience in aided
colleges. It has also to be observed that various factors regulate
the award of marks at the interview and there cannot be any
irregularity found in the marks awarded merely because another
set of interviewers, at a subsequent period, interviewed the same
persons and found some to be eligible for more marks.
37. On the totality of such circumstances as also
giving due weightage to the opinion of the High Level
Committee, we are of the opinion that the Principals appointed
Patna High Court L.P.A No.1376 of 2019 dt. 19-10-2023
in the year 2009 can be continued, but for the three persons who
were found to be disqualified, whose continuance has to be
considered individually.
38. The three persons who were found to be not
qualified to be appointed, were Dr. Anil Kumar Ishwar, Dr.
Rajendra Prasad Choudhur and Dr. Ashok Kumar Ajad. Two of
them, Dr. Anil Kumar Ishwar and Dr. Ashok Kumar Ajad were
found to be having Post Graduate and Ph.D. degrees in Hindi
and English respectively. Whether this enables them to be
considered for selection is the first question to be answered.
39. The requirement of educational qualification
as was extracted hereinabove is Acharya/Masters Degree in
Traditional Subjects with at least 55% of marks. The question
arises as to what is a Traditional Subject.
40. We have looked at the decisions in Dr. (Mrs.)
Annapurna Devi and Arvind Kumar Pandey (both Supra),
wherein the question was decided as to whether a person having
the required qualification in any of the subjects taught in the
college could be appointed as Principal. We bow down to the
declaration made by a coordinate Bench, but the same does not
have an application here, even if Hindi and English are taught in
the Sanskrit University, since the requirement of educational
Patna High Court L.P.A No.1376 of 2019 dt. 19-10-2023
qualification for appointment of Principal was Acharya, which
is a qualification in Sanskrit or a Masters Degree in Traditional
Subject, as distinguished from modern subjects. An attempt was
made by the learned Counsel to contend that Hindi,
Mathematics and English are Traditional Subjects, which we
cannot accept, in the particular context of appointments to
Sanskrit Colleges and the reference to Traditional Subjects in
the notification calling for applications.
41. The supplementary affidavit dated
03.10.2023, filed by Dr. Ashok Kumar Ajad in LPA No. 1376 of
2019 also speaks of the Traditional Subjects being English,
Hindi Psychology, Political Science and History, without any
substantiation thereof. In fact, Annexure-C/6 produced along
with the supplementary affidavit is the Guidelines and Syllabus
of Acharya examination. There are specific subjects noticed as
modern subjects which are : Hindi, Modern Mathematics, as
distinguished from Vedic Mathematics, Economics, Political
Science, Social Science, History and so on.
42. In such circumstances, what would be
considered traditional subjects would be subjects which are
taught under the head of Sanskrit for which also we get
sufficient indication from Annexure-E/6, the Guidelines and
Patna High Court L.P.A No.1376 of 2019 dt. 19-10-2023
Syllabus of Acharya Examination of the respondent-University.
Hence the eligibility for appointment as Principal in the Sanskrit
Colleges, as per the notification herein is either Acharya or a
Master in a traditional subject; meaning Sanskrit or related
ancillary subjects.
43. We gave opportunity to all the three
candidates, who were appointed and continuing as Principals,
found to be not qualified for appointment by the High Level
Committee to produce documents with respect to their
qualifications.
44. Anil Kumar Ishwar, appellant in L.P.A.
No.1408 of 2019 and respondent no.6 in the writ petition, has
filed a second supplementary affidavit dated 11.10.2023. He
has an M.Sc. (Mathematics), obtained in the year August, 1991,
which is evident from the mark-sheet produced along with
Annexure-A/1, series in the affidavit. He also has a qualification
of Ph.D. in Mathematics, which document is also produced as
Annexure-A/1 series, which is obtained in the year 1999.
Annexure-A/2 is the guidelines and syllabus of the respondent-
University from which he has obtained Acharya qualification.
Annexure-A/3 series is produced to establish his Acharya
qualification in Falit Jyotish and Veda. He is said to have
Patna High Court L.P.A No.1376 of 2019 dt. 19-10-2023
obtained qualification in Falit Jyotish in the year 1999 and
Acharya qualification in Veda obtained in the year 2000. The
document produced as guidelines and syllabus in the year 1999-
2000 at clause 1.2 indicates that it will be applicable for the first
year 1999-2000 and the second year in 2000-2001.
45. The Acharya course is of the duration of two
years. The appellant is said to have acquired qualification of
Acharya in the year 1999 in Falit Jyotish and in the year 2000 in
the subject Veda. The appellant could not have continued two
courses in the same year since he would have been in the second
year of Acharya in Falit Jyotish in 1998-99 when he is said to
have been studying in the first year of the course in Acharya
Veda, in the year 1998-99, since he acquired later qualification
in the year 2000.
46. The learned counsel would rely on the
guidelines produced in the supplementary affidavit which in
page-18 speaks of type of examinees as under:-
"Types of Examinees
Examinees shall be of two types:- Institutional
(Regular) and Private.
(a) Students studying as per the rule in any
institution after getting admission within three months
of beginning of the session, shall be treated as
institutional. Students different from this, shall be
treated as Private.
Patna High Court L.P.A No.1376 of 2019 dt. 19-10-2023
(b) The Private students may also belong to places
outside the state of Bihar.
(c) The Private examinee shall be entitled to
obtaining examination form only after getting
permission for examination from the university every
year. It shall be the duty of Head of the forwarding
institution that they shall forward the application form
of students only after verifying their eligibility and
shall keep the record related to their eligibility test
safe."
47. The above extract only indicates the
University having conducted regular courses and also enrolled
private students, the manner of instructions of which is not very
clear from the guidelines itself. Even if the private registration is
considered to be one of distance education, we find no enabling
provision where students already studying a subject can enroll
for another subject to obtain the very same qualification of
Acharya from the University. The learned Senior Counsel in that
circumstance pointed out the regulations from 2000 of the very
same University which has also been produced as Annexure-B
series from page 32 onwards. 12.1 was specifically pointed out,
a translation of which is extracted hereinunder:-
"12.1 The students admitted as "private student"
after passing "Shastri Examination after a period of
one year (in the second year)" shall be admitted in
Acharya First part and after passing first part shall be
admitted for the second part examination in the next
year."
Patna High Court L.P.A No.1376 of 2019 dt. 19-10-2023
48. We are not convinced that this would enable
the simultaneous participation in two courses, one in the final
year and one in the first year, of two different subjects to qualify
in the Acharya examination. This enables only the students
admitted as private students, after passing the Shastri
Examination, after a period of one year, to be admitted in
Acharya first part and after passing first part to be admitted for
the second part examination in the next year.
49. However, clause 11.6 of the very same
guidelines has to be noticed which enables the students who
have passed three years B.A. or B.Sc. including Maths as a
subject, who are eligible for admission in Acharya Part I in
Mathematics and Falit Jyotish. In the above circumstance, Anil
Kumar Ishwar's qualification at least as Acharya in Falit
Jyotish has to be found in his favour. The said candidate had a
Post Graduate qualification in Mathematics and after that he has
obtained a Acharya qualification in Falit Jyotish, the post of
which satisfies the required qualification.
50. Rajendra Prasad Choudhur, appellant in
L.P.A. No.1403 of 2019 and respondent no.10 in the writ
petition, has also filed a supplementary affidavit dated
11.10.2023 producing his qualifications. He has produced a
Patna High Court L.P.A No.1376 of 2019 dt. 19-10-2023
regulation of the University of Bihar from which he has
obtained a Post Graduate Qualification. The said candidate has
obtained a Post Graduate Qualification in Sanskrit in the
examination held in the month of January, 1988, a certificate of
which is also produced as Annexure-1. Immediately thereafter,
in December, 1988 he is said to have obtained his Post Graduate
degree in Hindi, which created a confusion with respect to his
Post Graduate Qualifications, which course normally has a
duration of two years. The learned Senior Counsel appearing for
the appellant has specifically pointed out clause 5 of the
Regulations and the Rules applicable to the University which
are extracted hereinunder:-
"5 (a) Any person holding a Master's Degree in
Arts may, on payment of the fee payable, be admitted
to the M.A. examination in any other subject or any
branch of the subject other than that in which he was
previously examined;
Provided that no one shall be admitted to the
M.A. examination in any subject for which a practical
course is necessary unless he has completed....
......work prescribed and obtained a certificate from
the Principal to that effect.
(b) A candidate examined under clause (a) above,
shall, if he attains the standard prescribed for the
degree of M.A., be granted a diploma."
51. The above extract also indicates that the
persons holding a Master's Degree in Arts, on payment of the
fee could be admitted to a M.A. examination in any other
Patna High Court L.P.A No.1376 of 2019 dt. 19-10-2023
subject, other than that in which he was previously examined,
subject to only the rider that such admission cannot be in a
subject where a practical course is necessary. Clause (b)
indicates that a candidate so attaining the standard prescribed
for the degree of M.A. would be granted a diploma. Considering
the above rule, it has to be found that the subsequent
qualification obtained by the said candidate which is in Hindi, is
only a Diploma. This does not disqualify the candidate from
being selected as a Principal since he has an M.A. in Sanskrit
from the very same University which was obtained first.
52. As far as Ashok Kumar Ajad, who is
respondent no.16 in the writ petition, is concerned, the
Committee found him to be not having M.A. in Sanskrit. The
said candidate has obtained M.A. in English in the year 1992
and degree of Acharya in Sahitya in the year 2003, which later
qualification enabled his appointment.
53. On the above verification of the
qualifications, we find that even with respect to respondent nos.
6, 10 and 16 in the writ petition, against whom adverse
comments were made by the High Level Committee, there
cannot be a disqualification urged since they have the required
qualification in Acharya or Post Graduate in Traditional
Patna High Court L.P.A No.1376 of 2019 dt. 19-10-2023
subjects.
54. On the above reasoning, we find that the writ
petition was without merit. The writ petition itself was delayed
and so was the intervenor application, the latter much more than
that of the challenge made through a writ petition. We are not
finding the writ petition to be bad only for the reason of delay
occasioned. We have found that the Selection Committee was
properly constituted, there cannot be any fault found in the
marks awarded and the persons who were selected had required
teaching experience. Insofar as the first writ petitioner is
concerned, he should not have been disqualified. However, he is
no more and we cannot be unsettling settled positions,
especially as of now when the party respondents have continued
for more than 14 years in the post to which they were selected.
They were all working previous to their selection and they have
lost their lien in their previous employment. We have found that
there was no disparity in the marks awarded and the ranking
cannot be faulted on the basis of the marks awarded as also the
other parameters specified.
55. We have dealt with the three disqualifications
as urged by the High Level Committee and found on the basis of
the certificates produced that they have the required
Patna High Court L.P.A No.1376 of 2019 dt. 19-10-2023
qualifications. It is only proper that in the above circumstances,
that the impugned judgment be set aside and the writ petition
dismissed.
56. We allow the Letters Patent Appeals setting
aside the impugned judgment and rejecting the writ petition.
Though the party respondents in the writ petition were
terminated after the judgment of the learned Single Judge, their
termination did not come into effect by virtue of the interim
order passed in the appeals. We find no reason to interfere with
their continuance, some of whom are already retired.
57. The Letters Patent Appeals stand allowed
without any order on costs.
(K. Vinod Chandran, CJ)
Partha Sarthy, J: I agree.
(Partha Sarthy, J)
Sujit/PKP/Sunil
AFR/NAFR
CAV DATE 06.10.2023
Uploading Date 19.10.2023
Transmission Date
