IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA MJC No.3118 of 2007 1. DR. MD. AZAMUL HAQUE SON OF LATE HAKIM SHAHUDUL HAQUE, RESIDENT OF MOHALLA MADHI MANZIL, SAMANPURA, P.S. SHASTRI NAGAR, DISTRICT PATNA, AT PRESENT HEAD OF THE DEPARTMENT URDU, SHRI GURU GOVIND SINGH COLLEGE, PATNA CITY, PATNA 2. DR. SURAJ NANDAN PRASAD, SON OF SHRI RAMDEO PRASAD, RESIDENT OF MOHALLA KUMHRAR, P.S. AGAMKUAN, DISTRICT- PATNA, AT PRESENT HEAD OF THE DEPARTMENT HISTORY, SHRI GURU GOVIND SINGH COLLEGE, PATNA CITY, PATNA Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE SECRETARY, HIGHER EDUCATION, GOVT. OF BIHAR, VIKASH BHAWAN, PATNA, NAMELYMR. ANAJANI KUMAR SINGH 3. THE DIRECTOR, HIGHER EDUCATION, GOVT. OF BIHAR, VIKASH BHAWAN, PATNA NAMELY, DHANANJAY KUMAR 4. THE MAGADH UNIVERSITY, BODHGAYA, THROUGH ITS REGISTRAR, NAMELY, DINES KUMAR YADAV 5. THE VICE CHANCELLOR, MAGADH UNIVERSITY, BODHGAYA, NAMELY, MR. BIRENDRA NATH PANDEY 6. DINESH KUMAR YADAV, THE REGISTRAR, MAGADH UNIVERSITY, BODHGAYA 7. THE FINANCE OFFICER, MAGADH UNIVERSITY, BODHGAYA NAMELY, SHRI NIWASH SRIVASTAVA 8. THE PRINCIPAL, SHRI GURU GOVIND SINGH COLLEGE, PATNA CITY, PATNA NAMELY, SMT. PRITIPAL KAUR ----------- 12 14.09.2010 Heard learned counsels for the petitioner, the State and the opposite party-University. A show cause has been filed on behalf of the State as well as the University. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the representation filed by the petitioner had four claims. Two claims were with respect to the period the college in question was made constituent and remaining two claims accrued after the college in question was made constituent to which the University was liable to make payment. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as regards the two of the claims which was liable to be paid by the University the - 2 - same has been paid, however the interest for delayed payment has not been paid. As regards the other two claims which relate to the period prior to the College was made constituent. The claims for salary has not been paid settled as yet although the State Government through its letter made certain query from the College concerned as well as the University. As regard the claim for payment of interest, learned counsel for the University submits that the claims which has been paid by the University relates to the arrears of salary and as there is no statute of the University providing for payment of interest over such arrears of salary, the same has not been paid. Be that as it may, since the University has made the payment with respect to the period after the College was made constituent after its verification from the auditors, this contempt application need not proceed further and the same is accordingly disposed of. However, it will be open for the petitioner to take the recourse of appropriate forum with respect to his claims for the period prior to the college in question was made constituent as also for payment of interest, if any, permissible on the amount already received by the petitioner. Manish/- ( Shailesh Kumar Sinha,J.)