Patna High Court
Premnandani Kumari vs Thetilka Manjhi Bhagalpur University on 5 January, 2024
Author: Anil Kumar Sinha
Bench: Anil Kumar Sinha
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.6135 of 2019
======================================================
Premnandani Kumari Wife of Vijay Kumar Singh Resident of Village- Milki,
P.S. Bihpur, District- Bhagalpur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. TheTilka Manjhi Bhagalpur University Bhagalpur.
2. The Vice-Chancellor, The Tilka Manjhi Bhaglpur University, Bhagalpur.
3. The Finance Officer, The Tilka Manjhi Bhaglpur University, Bhagalpur.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Amaresh Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Ashhar Mustafa, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 05-01-2024
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties concerned.
2. The petitioner has filed the present writ application
for a direction to the respondent- University to fix the pay of the
petitioner from the date of joining in the College i.e. 15.12.1986
by modifying the pay fixation done w.e.f. 01.04.2012 vide Pay
Fixation Form, annexed as Annexure-7 to the writ application.
3. The brief facts giving rise to the present writ
application are that the petitioner was appointed vide letter
no. 262 dated 07.11.1986 on the post of Correspondence Clerk
in a Private College run by the governing body namely Madan
Ahilya College, Navgachhia, Bhagalpur. Later on, this College
became constituent unit of Tilka Manjhi, Bhagalpur University,
Patna High Court CWJC No.6135 of 2019 dt.05-01-2024
2/6
Bhagalpur in the 4th phase. After becoming the constituent unit,
Principal of the College, vide letter 24.02.1988, sent a list of
Class-III employees working in the College, in which
petitioner's name figured at serial no. 16 having date of joining
as on 15.12.1986.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that from
the affidavit filed by the University, before the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in S.L.P. no. 6098 of 1997, by which the details
of working staff in the College was provided, it appears that the
name of petitioner figured at serial no. 71. He further submits
that Memo no. B/301-396 dated 02.01.2006, issued earlier, in
which it is stated that in compliance of the judgment/ order of
the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal no. 6098 of 1997
dated 12.10.2004 and on the recommendation of the Committee
constituted by the Syndicate, the Vide-Chancellor has absorbed
the services of the Non-Teaching Staffs working in the 4 th Phase
Colleges, in which the name of the petitioner also figured. He
next submits that in the pay fixation form issued by the
Registrar, the petitioner's salary has wrongly been fixed from
the date of absorption i.e. 01.04.2012 and not from the initial
date of joining in the College. He also submits that the petitioner
was earlier absorbed in the year 2006 and salary was released in
Patna High Court CWJC No.6135 of 2019 dt.05-01-2024
3/6
the scale of Rs. 3050-4590 of the Correspondence Clerk after
absorption but no opportunity of hearing was given to the
petitioner before modifying the pay fixation. He also submits
that once the petitioner was absorbed in the year 2006 treating
her year of joining as 1986, it cannot be changed or modified.
Lastly, he submits that the petitioner relies upon a judgment
rendered by this Court in the case of Akhilanand Singh and
others v. State of Bihar and others, reported in 2018 (3) PLJR
1029.
5. Learned counsel for the University argued that
petitioner has concealed the fact that after her absorption vide
Memo no. B/301-396 dated 02.01.2006, the issue of absorption
was again raised before this Hon'ble Court and finally, travelled
upto the Hon'ble Supreme Court in S.L.P. (C) No. 12591 of
2010, which was later on converted into Civil Appeal no. 2703
of 2017. During pendency of the Civil Appeal, the Hon'ble
Justice S.B. Sinha (Retd.) Commission (hereinafter referred to
as "the Commission") was constituted by the Hon'ble Supreme
Court on 19.08.2013 for verifying the claim of the employees
and submit a report. He next argued that the petitioner has also
concealed the fact that she filed a Claim Petition bearing
No. 743 of 2013 before the Commission seeking her absorption
Patna High Court CWJC No.6135 of 2019 dt.05-01-2024
4/6
on the post of Correspondence Clerk. The said Claim Petition
was decided by the Commission with the finding that the
petitioner may be absorbed in the services of the University
w.e.f. 01.04.2012. The report of the Commission was affirmed
by the Hon'ble Supreme Court vide judgment dated 31.08.2017,
passed in Civil Appeal no. 2703 of 2017 (Krishna Nand Yadav
and others v. Magadh University and others). Lastly, it is
submitted that in pursuance to the order passed by the said
Commission, the petitioner was absorbed in services w.e.f.
01.04.2012
and accordingly, the University fixed the pay of the
petitioner w.e.f. 01.04.2012.
6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and
have gone through the materials available on record. From
perusal of the record, it appears that the petitioner filed a Claim
petition no. 743 of 2013 before the Hon'ble Justice S.B. Sinha
(Retd.) Commission for her absorption on the post of
Correspondence Clerk. From the order dated 19.11.2015, passed
by the Commission, it transpires that Justice Agrawal
Commission, in its report, showed that in the category of
Correspondence Clerk, three posts were recommended and the
name of the petitioner did not find place therein. Thereafter, the
petitioner filed an application before the Commission for
Patna High Court CWJC No.6135 of 2019 dt.05-01-2024
impleadment of Smt. Sunaina Singh contending therein that
Sunaina Singh having been appointed as a Counter Clerk, her
name could not have been shown against the post of
Correspondence Clerk. The Commission arrived at the
conclusion keeping in view the fact that there is hardly any
difference between a Correspondence Clerk and a Counter Clerk
and Justice Agrawal Commission has clubbed all the catergories
of Clerks as 'Assistants' and due to that, the absorption of Smt.
Sunaina Singh as Correspondence Clerk cannot be held to be
bad in law and accordingly, the application for impleadment of
the petitioner was dismissed.
7. The Hon'ble Commission, taking note of the
submissions made by Counsel appearing on behalf of the
University that one Sri Gurudev Poddar has retired on
31.03.2012 and the claimants may be adjusted against the said
vacant post, held that subject to the condition that the University
has not filled up the said post and the Claimant has been
working, she may be absorbed in the services of the University
w.e.f. 01.04.2012 and allowed the Claim Petition to the
abovementioned extent.
8. On the basis of the order of the S.B. Sinha
Commission, the petitioner was absorbed on the post of
Patna High Court CWJC No.6135 of 2019 dt.05-01-2024
Correspondence Clerk w.e.f. 01.04.2012 vide Office Order
no. 322 of 2018 dated 17.09.2018. The report of the
Commission has attained finality after the same having been
affirmed by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Krishna Nand Yadav
(supra). The petitioner was absorbed in the services w.e.f.
01.04.2012. The claim of the petitioner for fixation of pay with
effect from the date of joining i.e. 15.12.1986 is not acceptable.
9. Considering the aforesaid facts and discussions, I
come to the conclusion that fixation of pay of the petitioner by
the University w.e.f. 01.04.2012 is not arbitrary and
unreasonable. Accordingly, the writ application stands
dismissed.
(Anil Kumar Sinha, J)
rinkee/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 25.01.2024
Transmission Date NA
