IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.10192 of 2003 1. RAGHUVANSH KUER son of Late Ram Sagar Kuer, resident of village- Chowki, Police Station Sahebpur, District- Begusarai. 2. Ashok Kumar Singh, son of late Lalan Singh, resident of village- Rajbara, Police Station- Barauni, District- Begusarai. 3. Shiv Kumar Mishra, son of late Satya Narayan Mishra, resident of village- Rajbara, Police Station- Barauni, District- Begusarai. … Petitioners. Versus 1. THE V.C.,L.N.M.UNIVERSITY, Darbhanga. 2. The Registrar, L. N. Mithila University, Darbhanga. 3. The Principal, A.P. S. M. College, Barauni. ------------- 3. 09.08.2010 Heard Learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. Parthsarthi, learned counsel for the University. The prayer of the petitioners in this writ petition reads as follows:- “(i) Issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus and/or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing and commanding the respondents to make payment of salary and other benefits to the petitioners from the date of joining i.e. 4.1.2002 on daily wages in pursuance of letter dated 22.12.2001 and 4.1.2002 issued under the signature of the Registrar, L N Mithila University and Principal of the College respectively under the order of Hon’ble High Court passed in CWJC No. 9809 of 1998 and other analogous cases. (ii) Issuance of a writ, order or direction to make payment of salary to the petitioners in the similar way as other identically situated employees are getting after joining in pursuance of same letter dated 22.12.2001 issued under the signature of the Registrar of the University.” 2 Learned counsel for the petitioners would very fairly submit that now the question in this writ petition after the petitioners’ daily wages engagement has been put to an end in the month of May 2006 would remain confined to the payment of salary on daily wages from 4.1.2002 to May 2006. Counsel for the petitioners would submit that there is no dispute that after the joining of the petitioners was accepted in terms of order of the Chancellor of the University and the petitioners had also worked; the petitioners would be entitled for payment of salary on daily wages on the same terms and conditions on which they were engaged. As usual, there is no counter affidavit on behalf of the University and therefore this Court would find it difficult to understand as to what has prevented the petitioners from at least getting their legitimate dues. This writ petition is of the year 2003 and a period of seven years has not been good enough for the University to file its counter affidavit. This Court would also not expect any miracle from them and accordingly, this writ petition is being disposed of with the following 3 directions: (i) The petitioners will file their individual representation enclosing the documents with regard to the proof of their working by way of absentee statement of the Principal of the College and/or a certificate of the Principal of the College based on attendance register that they had worked in between the period 4.1.2002 to May 2006. (ii) The admissible amount of salary in terms of rates of daily wages fixed by the University will be paid to the petitioners within a period of three months from the date of submission of such statement by the Principal of college of the petitioners. (iii) If any portion of claim of the petitioners is rejected, the Registrar of the University will be under obligation to give reasons for 4 the same. (iv) Whatever payment is found admissible and payable to the petitioners must be paid to them within three months from the date of order of the Registrar through the Principal of the College by bankers’ cheque. With the aforementioned observation and direction, this writ petition is disposed of. kanchan/ (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)