IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.9025 of 2009 1. ASHOK KUMAR JHA, SON OF SHRI BEDA NAND JHA, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE-HAINTHI BALI, P.S. BHAIRAV ASTHAN, DISTRICT- MADHUBANI. 2. CHANDRAMANI KUMARI, WIFE OF SHRI PAWAN KUMAR PRASAD (HATHI) , RESIDENT OF GANDHI CHOWK, WARD NO. 12, P.S. AND DISTRICT-MADHUBANI. 3. DHIRENDRA KUMAR SAH, SON OF LATE SUKHDEO SAH, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE-LAKSHMINIYA, P.S.-LAUKAHI, DISTRICT-MADHUBANI. 4. NIRENDRA PRASAD GUPTA, SON OF SHRI GOSAI LAL SAH, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE-BELHA, P.S. LAUKAHI, DISTRICT- MADHUBANI. 5. KALYAN MAHASETH, WIFE OF SHRI RAM KRISHNA MAHASETH, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE-BHAUARA, P.S. AND DISTRICT-MADHUBANI. 6. URMILA PODDAR, WIFE OF SHRI RAM KUMAR PODDAR, RESIDENT OF WARD NO. 2, P.S. AND DISTRICT-MADHUBANI. 7. District Education Officer KRISHNA JHA, SON OF LATE RADHA KANT JHA, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE-NARHI, P.S. ARER, DISTRICT- MADHUBANI. 8. LAL BAHADUR SAH SON OF SHRI SAGAR MAL SAH, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE-BARHI, P.S. PHULPARAS, DISTRICT-MADHUBANI. 9. MOTI NATH JHA, SON OF SHRI RAMA NATH JHA, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE-MANGRAUNI, P.S. RAJ NAGAR, DISTRICT-MADHUBANI 10. RAMANAND GANDHI, SON OF SHRI BINDESHWARI PODDAR, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE-HARDIYA, P.S. SAHEBPUR KAMAL, DISTRICT-BEGUSARAI. 11. RAMASHISH KARAK, SON OF SHRI BINOD PANJIYAR, RESIDENT OF KARAK MAARG, P.S. AND DISTRICT-MADHUBANI. 12. HARI SHYAM CHOUDHARY, SON OF LATE GANESH CHOUDHARY, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE-MORO KANSI SIMRI, P.S. KANSI SIMRI, DISTRICT-DARBHANGA 13. KAILASH PRASAD GUPTA, SON OF SHRI SHYAM SUNDAR PRASAD, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE-SUNDARPUR, P.S. AND DISTRICT- DARBHANGA. 14. RITA DEVI, DAUGHTER OF SHRI UMA KANT LAL DAS, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE-KANHAULI, MALLIK TOL, P.S. KHAJAULI, DISTRICT- MADHUBANI. 15. LAKSHMAN JHA, SON OF SHRI KAMLA KANT JHA, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE-BALIGARH, P.S. SAIDPUR, DISTRICT-SITAMARHI. 16. LAKSHMI NARAYAN PANJIYAR, SON OF SHRI ANUP PANJIYAR, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE-DHAKJARI, P.S. –ARER, DISTRICT- MADHUBANI. 17. SUBODH KUMAR CHOUDHARY, SON OF SHRI DHAIRYA NARAYAN CHOUDHARY, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE-PINDARUCH, P. S. KAMTAUL, DISTRICT-DARBHANGA. 18. MANOJ KUMAR JHA, SON OF LATE SHIVA NAND JHA, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE-BHAWANIPUR, P.S. SAKARI, DISTRICT-MADHUBANI. 19. POONAM SINHA W/O ALAKH DEO NARAIN SINHA, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE-DIVANIYA, P.S. BARACHATTI, DISTRICT-GAYA …………… …………….. PETITIONERS. 2 Versus 1. LALIT NARAYAN MITHILA UNIVERSITY, KAMESHWAR NAGAR, DARBHANGA THROUGH ITS REGISTRAR. 2. THE Vice Chancellor , LALIT NARAYAN MITHILA UNIVERSITY, KAMESHWAR NAGAR, DARBHANGA. 3. THE REGISTRAR, LALIT NARAYAN MITHILA UNIVERSITY, KAMESHWAR NAGAR, DARBHANGA. 4. J.M.D.P.L. MAHILA COLLEGE, MADHUBANI, THROUGH ITS PRINCIPAL. 5. THE PRINCIPAL, J.M.D.P.L. MAHILA COLLEGE, MADHUBANI. 6. STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA. 7. PRINCIPAL SECRETARY , HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA …………… ……………….. RESPONDENTS. ----------- For the Petitioners: 1. Mr. Chitranjan Sinha, Sr. Advocate Mr. Binodanand Mishra For the university: Mrs. Nivedita Nirvikar For the state: Mr. Rakesh Ambastha, A.C. to AAG-5 2. 10.08.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, the state and the counsel appearing for L.N.Mithila university. Petitioners in the present application are non- teaching employees working in J.M.D.P.L. Mahila College, Madhubani. The college, in question is a Constituent unit of L.N. Mithila university, Darbhanga. Petitioners were appointed on Class-III and Class-IV employees. Their case is that in between 1981 to 1986, they were appointed in the year, 1986 when the college became a constituent unit of L.N. Mithila university. The formal list relating to assets and liabilities of the college were submitted by the Vice Chancellor, in order to enter into formal agreement in terms of Section 4(1)(14) of the University Act. So far the petitioners are concerned, for this purpose, three men 3 Committee was constituted. The committee prepared a report and submitted its report along with list of the employees. In the list of non-teaching staffs, petitioners’ names were there. A formal decision was taken on recommendation of the Five Members Committee constituted by the State Government and petitioners were absorbed by Notification dated 12.02.1990. Subsequently, petitioners apprehend their termination from service as such, they filed C.W.J.C. No. 4021 of 1995 which was allowed by order dated 31.01.1997. The order was challenged before the Supreme Court by the university but the order passed by the High Court was confirmed. Petitioners’ further case is that on 04.07.2005, the Syndicate took decision to regularize the service of the petitioners. In terms of the Resolution of the Syndicate, the university issued Notification regularizing petitioners’ services. Now again , petitioners had to face threat of termination as by order dated 21.06.2008 they were terminated from their services without any opportunity of hearing. Termination order was challenged in C.W.J.C. No. 12832 of 2008. The impugned order of termination was quashed by order dated 01.09.2008. In view of the order passed by the High Court, the university also issued the Notification dated 21.06.2008 i.e. the order terminating petitioners’ service. Thereafter, on 11.05.2008, the universities issued show cause notice to the petitioners asking them to show cause regarding legality of their regularization. Petitioners 4 have already submitted their show cause. Petitioners’ grievance is that they have been paid their salary till February, 2009. But after issuance of notice and submission of their show-cause, without any rhyme and reason, since March, 2009, their salary has been stopped though they are working and no further order has been passed by the university so far their service is concerned. It has also been stated specifically by the petitioners that university had made a requisition for release of fund to make payment of the arrears of salary to the petitioners and similarly situated employees and fund has already been released in this regard. Mrs. Nivedita Nirvikar, learned counsel appearing for the university, has admitted the fact that necessary fund on requisition of the university has been released by the State Government. However, her submission is that despite release of the fund, the State Government has issued different letters restraining payment to the petitioners who are the non-teaching staffs appointed in the fourth phase constituent colleges in the university as till date, the legality of their appointment and regularization is under consideration. Counsel appearing for the state is not in a position to say anything regarding the different letters which has been referred by the counsel appearing for the university restraining payment of salary to the petitioners despite the fact that for payment of petitioners’ salary, funds have already been 5 released. It is an admitted legal position that an employee cannot continue to work on the post and no order either termination of his service or any legal order restraining payment of salary has been passed, payment of salary cannot be stopped. Admitted position is that at present, petitioners are working. Neither there is any termination order or legally any order restraining payment of salary to the petitioners. In the given situation, even if the State Government has issued any letter as stated above, counsel appearing for the university restraining payment of salary to the petitioners cannot be considered as an act which has got any legal sanction on the basis of such illegal orders, payment of salary to the non- teaching staffs of the concerned colleges for whose even funds have been released, cannot be stopped. This writ application is , accordingly, disposed of allowing payment of salary in favour of the petitioners. The respondents/Vice Chancellor of L. N. Mithila university and the Principal of is directed to J.M.D.P.L. Mahila College, Madhubani are directed to make payment of salary to the petitioners and continue to make payment of salary till date same situation continues. akv/ ( Mridula Mishra, J )