IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.15654 of 2006 Dr. Veena Sinha, W/o Sri Prabhu Nath Roy, R/o P-59, Ashiana Nagar, Phase-I, P.S. Shastri Nagar, P.O. Ashiana Nagar, Town & Dist. Patna. ---------- Petitioner Versus 1. Magadh University, Bodh Gaya through its Registrar. 2. The Vice Chancellor, Magadh University, Bodh Gaya. 3. The Registrar, Magadh University, Bodh Gaya. 4. The Chancellor, University of Bihar, Raj Bhawan, Patna through O.S.D. to the Chancellor. 5. The State of Bihar through the Commissioner-cum-Secretary, Higher Education Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. -------- Respondents ----------- 4 27.7.2011 Heard Mr. P.N. Shahi, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Hans Raj, learned counsel for the Magadh University as also counsel for the State. The grievance of the petitioner as highlighted by her in paragraph no.1 of the writ application, reading as follows:- “1(i) For commanding the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for promotion to the post of University Professor from appropriate date and to grant her such promotion in the facts and circumstances of the case fully enumerated hereinbelow. (ii) For grant of any other incidental/consequential or other appropriate relief/reliefs to which 2 the petitioner may be found entitled including the payment of balance amount of salary due to the petitioner on account of grant of promotion as prayed for above.” has been somehow sought to be first confused and then answered in a vague manner in the two counter affidavits filed by the University. Firstly, it was said in the counter affidavit that the petitioner was promoted to the post of Reader with effect from 1.2.1985 but, then, the same was shifted to 30.6.1987. Learned counsel for the petitioner, however, has explained that under the order of this Court, the petitioner’s promotion on the post of Reader has been confirmed with effect from 1.2.1985 and, therefore, the entitlement of the petitioner for next promotion on the post of Professor would also be with effect from 1.2.1991 and not 30.6.1993 as has been explained in the counter affidavit. Mr. Shahi has further submitted that in fact the University also has erroneously questioned the date of grant of Ph.D. of the petitioner by taking a plea that such Ph.D. 3 was awarded to her on 26.12.1998. Mr. Shahi in this regard has produced the relevant document in support of the claim of award of Ph.D. to the petitioner in the rejoinder affidavit clearly showing that such Ph.D. was awarded to the petitioner on 26.12.1988 as contained in Annexure-10. It thus becomes clear that the following plea taken by the respondent in paragraph nos. 6 & 7 of the counter affidavit; “6. That the petitioner got PhD degree on 26.12.1998 but she did not produce PhD to any candidate under her guidance. She submitted the copies of the result of PhD awarded so that it might be verified. There is no publication of research papers or book. She submitted only the typed copieds or hand written but the journals or books is essential. 7. That thus, it is not possible to consider the case of Promotion from Reader to Professor under T.B.S. in the absence of magazine (Journals) or books showing her article research level published and should had to be related to her subject secondary copies of result published from which it may be verified that she has produced PhD 4 under her guidance.” is not only factually incorrect but, also made without application of mind. This Court would expect that the counter affidavit, being filed by the Magadh University, is properly vetted by the Registrar of the University and is not filed in a casual and mechanical manner. Be that as it may, it becomes clear that the case of the petitioner for promotion on the post of Professor had not been considered till the date of her retirement. Since consideration of such promotion to the petitioner has become due with effect from 1.2.1991, this Court, without expressing its view on the merit of the claim of the petitioner, would direct the Vice Chancellor and the Registrar of the University to ensure that the case of the petitioner for her promotion on the post of Professor is decided within a period of six months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order and the petitioner is also extended the consequential financial benefits of such promotion as has been given to the other similarly situated teachers of the 5 University. In the event the University will require any further information/document from the petitioner, the same will be requisitioned within a period of one month from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order whereafter the petitioner must submit the same in next fifteen days in order to enable the University to take a final decision in the aforementioned period of six months. With the aforementioned observations and direction, this application is disposed of. Rsh (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)