IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.11519 of 2003 AZFAR HUSSAIN, son of Prof. Azhar Hussain, resident of Mohalla Mandkeshawar Khan, P.S. Sasaram, District Rohtas at present Laboratory Incharge Department of Botany, A.S.College, Bikramganj, Rohtas ... Petitioner Versus 1. THE VEER KUER SINGH UNIVERSITY, Arrah, through its Registrar 2. The Vice Chancellor, Veer Kuer Singh University, Arrah 3. The Registrar, Veer Kuer Singh University, Arrah 4. The Principal, A.S.College, Bikramganj, Rohtas ... Respondents With C.W.J.C.No. 8129 of 1999 AZFAR HUSSAIN, son of Prof. Azhar Hussain, resident of Mohalla Mandkeshawar Khan, P.S. Sasaram, District Rohtas at present Laboratory Incharge Department of Botany, A.S.College, Bikramganj, Rohtas ... Petitioner Versus 1. THE VEER KUER SINGH UNIVERSITY, Arrah, through its Registrar 2. The Vice Chancellor, Veer Kuer Singh University, Arrah 3. The Principal, A.S.College, Bikramganj, Rohtas ... Respondents ----------- 5. 8.10.2010 Having heard counsel for the parties as with regard to the following relief in these two writ petitions: C.W.J.C.No. 11519/2003 “This is an application for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the letter issued vide letter no. 412 dated 22.9.2003 under the signature of respondent no.3 under which the regularization of the petitioner has been repealed which was 2 communicated to the petitioner by office of the respondent no.4 under its letter vide reference no. 109 dated 9.10.2003 and further for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents not to interfere with the regular service of the petitioner and further also for issuance of an appropriate writ/order/ direction directing the respondent to allow the petitioner to continue on the post of Laboratory incharge in the department of Botany in the College concerned and further also be pleased to grant all the consequential benefits to the petitioner for which he is entitled to in accordance with law.” C.W.J.C.No. 8129/1999 “This is an application for the issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to make the payment of full salary from 22.3.85 to 31.12.95 after adjusting the amount which has been paid to the petitioner during the said period and further for the issuance of an appropriate writ/ direction directing the respondents to grant the petitioner first time bound promotion, earned leave which is to be counted from 22.3.85 and further be pleased to direct the respondents to deposit the 3 provident fund amount in his pass book after deducting the same from his dues salary in accordance with law to open the service book of the petitioner, to make payment of bonus from 22.3.85 as admissible under law and to make/ grant all the consequential benefits to the petitioner on the basis of his regularization as made w.e.f. 22.3.85 and further also be pleased to direct the respondents to make the payment of admissible interest on the payment as it to be made to the petitioner in accordance with law.” this Court is of the considered opinion that now after the order has been issued by the University absorbing/ regularizing the petitioner on the post of Demonstrator with effect from 22.3.1985, the dispute being raised in these two writ petitions pertaining to the period of regularization and consequential payment of salary on the post of Laboratory In-charge will have little relevance, inasmuch as the order dated 7.10.2006 (Annexure 16) itself envisages that buds osru dk fu/kkZj.k iz;ksx izn”Zd ds :i esa inukfer fd, tkus dh frfFk ls Lohd`r osrueku esa fd;k tk,xkA cdk;s osru dk 4 Hkqxrku jkT; ljdkj ls vuqnku jkf’k izkIr jkf’k izkIr gksus ij fd;k tk,xkA** It will, therefore, be clear that this is a period of which the petitioner is claiming salary by virtue of regularization in these two writ petitions and that now has some how been made subject matter of a fresh writ application filed by the petitioner when he was partly denied the benefit of actual payment of salary in view of some order of the State Government. Let it be noted that the University in fact had already fixed the salary of the petitioner in terms of the order dated 7.10.2006 designating the petitioner on the post of Demonstrator with effect from 22.3.1985 but then the State Government had refused to release fund for the same and such action of the State Government and its order has been assailed by the petitioner by filing C.W.J.C.No. 4088/2010. In the background of the facts and the circumstances noted above, these two writ petitions have, therefore, become infructuous and are disposed of accordingly with a liberty to the petitioner to raise 5 any issue now in his pending writ application. (Mihir Kumar Jha,J.) Surendra/