IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.3412 of 2002 BIJAY KUMAR SINGH, S/O SRI ADITYA NARAYAN SINGH, R/O VILLAGE-AJAN, P.O. AND P.S.-MADANPUR, DISTRICT-AURANGABAD, PRESENTLY POSTED AS STORE KEEPER IN SACHCHIDANAND SINHA COLLEGE, AURANGABAD, DISTRICT-AURANGABAD. ………………PETITIONER. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH ITS CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVT. OF BIHAR, MAIN SECRETARIAT, PATNA. 2. SECRETARY, HIGHER EDUCATION, HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT, GOVT. OF BIHAR, NEW SECRETARIAT, PATNA. 3. VICE-CHANCELLOR, MAGADH UNIVERSITY, BODH GAYA, DISTRICT-GAYA, BIHAR. 4. THE REGISTRAR, MAGADH UNIVERSITY, BODH GAYA, DISTRICT-GAYA, BIHAR. 5. THE PRINCIPAL, SACHCHIDA NAND SINHA COLLEGE, AURANGABAD, DISTRICT-AURANGABAD, BIHAR. 6. SRI ARUN KUMAR, LAB INCHARGE, DEPARTMENT OF BOTANY, S.S. COLLEGE, AURANGABAD, DISTRICT- AURANGABAD. …………………RESPONDENTS. ----------- 4 24.08.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. Petitioner has filed this writ application for a direction to the respondent no. 3, the Vice-Chancellor of the University to approve the resolution of the Development Advisory Committee of the college and grant him promotion to the post of Laboratory In-charge with effect from the date the juniors to the petitioner have been promoted. Prayer has also been made for payment of monetary benefits to the petitioner as a consequence of such promotion. Learned counsel for the petitioner has pointed out that the Development Advisory Committee of the college had recommended the - 2 - names of different incumbents for their promotion as Laboratory In-charge vide Annexure- 2. In view of the recommendation of the Committee the Principal of the college also recommended the case of the petitioner and others to the University for grant of such promotion vide Annexure-3 and 4. However, the University has ignored the case of the petitioner and has granted promotion to four incumbents, vide Annexure-5, as Laboratory In- charge by order dated 15.12.1987. He also submits that some of the persons of the University, vide Annexure-5, who are juniors in service to the petitioner have been further promoted and, therefore, the petitioner has right to be considered for promotion at least from that date the juniors were promoted. He also submits that the petitioner had filed representations before the Vice-Chancellor much earlier before filing of the writ application, a copy whereof is annexed as Annexure-6 series, but they have not been considered by the Vice- Chancellor so far. This case was filed on 06.03.2002. However, no counter affidavit has been filed by the University in spite of passage of more than 7 years, to show that the claim of the - 3 - petitioner has been considered and/or denied by the competent authority or has even been considered. Learned Counsel for the University is also not in a position to contend that the claim of the petitioner is in active consideration or has been considered and disposed of by the competent authority by now in any manner. In the circumstances, in view of delay caused in the case, this Court has no option but to dispose of this writ application with the following directions:- 1. Petitioner must file fresh copy of representations (annexed as Annexures-6 series with the writ application) or a fresh representation before respondent no. 3, within one month from today along with a copy of this order. The representation must contain all the claims of the petitioner distinctly and in separate paragraphs and must accompany documents connected with his service history and other documents/circulars/orders etc. on the basis of which petitioner asserts his right to get the claims. 2. The concerned respondent, upon receipt of the representation, with a copy of - 4 - this order, shall immediately take it into consideration, and, if necessary, after hearing the petitioner in person or through representative, as he may feel proper, shall pass final orders within three months of the receipt of the same. In case the concerned respondent is not the competent authority to pass final orders in the matter, he shall refer the matter within two months with his detailed consideration and definite opinion in respect of each claim to the competent authority for passing final orders in the matter, who, after hearing anyone and after examining any records as he may deem necessary, shall pass final orders in the matter within one month from the date of receipt of reference from the concerned respondent. 3. The final order of the concerned respondent or of competent authority or the reference order of the concerned respondent sent to the competent authority must show that (i) each and every claim of the petitioner has been noticed; (ii) each and every claim has been separately considered and a definite finding/opinion has been arrived at in respect of each and every claim with regard to its - 5 - admissibility or inadmissibility and (iii) all the relevant laws/circulars/orders etc. in respect of each and every claim have been taken into consideration for its acceptance or rejection by the said final order. 4. After calculating the arrears of the petitioner and the amount which became due to him, if the University feels that due to paucity of fund it cannot release the amount to the petitioner, it shall make specific requisition for the amount in respect of particular dues of the petitioner from the State Government within the same period and upon receipt of such requisition, the State Government authorities of the Department of Higher Education shall scrutinize the same and shall release the amount which is found admissible as arrears to the petitioner within one month thereafter. 5. All consequential orders, in respect of the admitted claims, must also be issued along with the passing of the final order, and payments of any consequential monetary benefits must be ensured within one month of the passing of the said final order and issue of the said consequential orders. 6. The said final order must be served - 6 - upon/communicated to the petitioner within the said three months and it must clearly mention the grounds and findings for rejecting any claim with reference to specific law/circular/order for coming to that finding. It goes without saying that this Court has not gone into the claims of the petitioner on merits which shall be considered and decided by the respondents within the time fixed as above and strictly in accordance with law. Arvind/ (J. N. Singh, J.)