IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC NO.10723 OF 2006 BHAIRAW MOHAN PD.SINGH, SON OF SHYAM PRASAD SINGH, RESIDENT OF MOHALLA-PANJABI COLONY, WARD NO.5, SAMASTIPUR, POLICE STATION-SAMASTIPUR, DISTRICT-SAMASTIPUR. ………PETITIONER. VERSUS 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE COMMISSIONER CUM SECRETARY HIGHER EDUCATION, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA. 2. THE VICE-CHANCELLOR, LALIT NARAYAN MITHILA UNIVERSITY, KAMESHWAR NAGAR, DARBHANGA. 3. THE REGISTRAR, LALIT NARAYAN MITHILA UNIVERSITY, KAMESHWAR NAGAR, DARBHANGA. 4. THE FINANCE OFFICER, LALIT NARAYAN MITHILA UNIVERSITY, KAMESHWAR NAGAR, DARBHANGA. 5. PRINCIPAL, RAM NIRIKSHAN ATMA RAM COLLEGE, SAMASTIPUR. 6. PRINCIPAL, D.S.K.N. COLLEGE, NARHAN, SAMASTIPUR. 7. PRINCIPAL, UMA PANDEY COLLEGE, PUSA, SAMASTIPUR. ………RESPONDENTS. ----------- 2 03.11.2010 Heard counsel for the petitioner. No one appears for the University. The prayer of the petitioner in this writ application is for issuance of a direction to the respondents for following payments on the following heads:- I. Differential of salary from September 1992 to March 1993 Rs.16,420/- on account of UGC Scale (D.B.K.N. College, Narhan) II. Differential of salary from July 1993 to February 1995 Rs.57,808/- on account of revised UGC Scale (R.N.A.R. College, Samastipur. 2 III. Salary from May 1981 to August 1981 Rs.8714/-(U.P. College, Pusa). IV. Differential of salary Rs.33853/-(Co-operative College, Begusarai) V. D.D.A. Rs.34,952/- VI. Enhanced D.A. Rs.55865/- VII. Deffered D.A. Rs.38,607/- VIII. Differential of salary from April 1984 to December 1990 on account of Promotion in professor. It is not in dispute that the petitioner was in permanent employment in Lalit Narayan Mithila University, Kameshwar Nagar, Darbhanga and had retired from service on 31.3.1995. The petitioner having been denied payment of his alleged outstanding dues for the period September 1992 onwards as mentioned in the prayer despite filing his representation, not only before for his retirement but even after his retirement, has ultimately filed this writ petition. The counsel for the petitioner has submitted that despite repeated attempts by the petitioner the authorities of the University did not take any decision on the series of representations filed by the petitioner. From the representation of the petitioner, as contained in Annexure-4, it would 3 however, appear that the payment claimed therein was for a different period and different amount other than what has been claimed by the petitioner in this writ application. The petitioner's representation dated 06.2.2006 , as contained in Annexure-4, in fact is wholly vague inasmuch as it is said therein that during the period of his functioning in different colleges from 11.7.1975 till the date of his retirement there were some outstanding dues of his salary and allowances. It is, therefore, clear that the petitioner has raised a wholly stale claim by filing this writ application on 31.8.2006 and in the opinion of this court such stale claim cannot be entertained specially even the cause of action had arisen as per back some fourteen years earlier in September 1992. This Court, therefore, is not inclined to issue a direction for payment of the aforementioned amount save and except making an observation that any of the admitted amount to which the petitioner is entitled in law and its payment has been extended to his counter part working or retired employee, the same also be made available to the petitioner. With the aforementioned observation, this writ petition is disposed of. PN/Devendra (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)