IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.14541 of 2005 PHULESHWAR CHAUDHARY, son of late Banbari Prasad Chaudhary, resident of village- Kajha, P. S.- K. Nagar, District- Purnea… Petitioner. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR through the Secretary, Higher Education, Government of Bihar, New Secretariat Patna. 2. The Vice Chancellor, Lalit Narain Mithila University, Darbhanga. 3. The Registrar, Lalit Narain Mithila University, Darbhanga. 4. The Vice- Chancellor, B. N.Mandal University, Lalu Nagar, Madhepura. 5. The Registrar, B. N. Mandal University, Laloo Nagar, Madhepura. 6. The Principal, Purnea College, Purnea. …. Respondents. ----------- 3 16.8.2010 Heard counsel for the petitioner, counsel for L. N. Mithila University, counsel for B. N. Mandal University as also counsel for the State. The prayer of the petitioner in this writ petition reads as follows:- “(i) For issuance of an appropriate writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the order dated 15.5.2004 issued under the signature of the respondent no. 3 and contained in his Memo No. 141-43/C/04 dated 15.5.2004, whereby and whereunder the respondent no. 3 has been pleased to reduce the pay- scale of the petitioner and fixed the lower scale without any valid reason. (ii) For issuance of an appropriate writ in the nature of mandamus, commanding and directing the respondent authorities to fix the pay scale of the petitioner in the pay-scale of Rs.2000-3800/- which is admissible to the petitioner in accordance with law and the same was paid to the other similarly situated person. 2 (iii) For issuance of an appropriate writ in the nature of mandamus, commanding and directing the respondent authorities to pay the gratuity, leave encashment arrears of pension and other admissible dues on the basis of pay-scale of Rs.2000-3800/- as well as according to the recommendation of 5th Pay Revision Committee with statutory as well as penal interest. (iv) For issuance of an appropriate writ in the nature of mandamus, commanding and directing the respondent authorities to pay the arrears of salary which was dues with the University since long back in pursuant to the letter no. 841 dated 13.4.1991 with statutory as well as pendent lite interest.” Counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner was appointed on the post of Librarian in Purnea College, Purnea way back on 19.8.1950 and when the said college was taken over and made constituent unit of L. N. Mithila University in the year 1975, the list showing strength of staff of College dated 5.2.1976 by itself would go to show that the petitioner for long 26 years had continued on the post of Librarian and as such the decision of the authority of the University not to grant him the pay scale of Rs.2000-3800/- pursuant to the recommendation of 5th Pay Revision Committee as approved by the State Government in the year 1986 was 3 wholly illogical. He would accordingly submit that the impugned order passed by the Vice-Chancellor of the University dated 15.5.2004 holding that the petitioner was not entitled to pay scale of Rs.2000-3800/- is clearly unsustainable and the finding recorded by him that such pay scale was inadmissible to the petitioner due to lack of qualification for the post of Librarian is contrary to the spirit of take over of the college. Counsel for the University, on the other hand, would point out that the appointment of the petitioner by the private governing body while the college was an affiliated College, on the post of Librarian would not bind the University for accepting him as a Librarian after the College became a constituent unit inasmuch as there are sufficient evidence to show that the petitioner’s services were taken over only as Class III employee and not as a librarian and in this context, he relies on paragraph 5 of the writ petition itself which reads as follows;- “ 5. That in the year 1983, he was appointed to the post of Upper Division Clerk in the pay-scale of Rs.880- 1510 and accordingly Purnea College, Purnea by letter no. 145-90 dated 4 24.3.1990 requested to the Finance Officer, L. N. Mithila University to pay the arrears of salary amount to Rs.26,602.40 paise for the period 01.03.1983 to November 1986.” He would also submit that the petitioner had retired in the year 1992 and his entire retirement benefit has already been paid in the admissible pay-scale in which he had continued in service and had drawn his salary and therefore the present attempt on the part of the petitioner by filing this writ petition on 28.11.2005 for claiming payment of salary in the revised pay scale of Rs.2000-3800/- from 1.1.1986 is actually espousing a wholly stale claim which should not be entertained by this Court. In the opinion of this Court, there is no document to show that after the College became a constituent unit the services of the petitioner were taken over as a Librarian. There is also no averment in the writ petition that the petitioner possessed the requisite qualification for the post of Librarian as laid down in the statute at the time of appointment in the year 1950. The reliance placed by the petitioner on a certificate of degree 5 in Library Science of the year 1975 could be of no avail at least for the purpose of recognizing the service of the petitioner as Librarian of the College and in fact there is also no order to this effect after the college became constituent. Moreover all these things will infact pale into insignificance on account of admission of the petitioner himself that his promotion in 1985 must after the take over of the college in 1975 was given only on the post of Upper Division Clerk. The moment, the petitioner claims that he had got promotion in the clerical cadre in 1983 after the college had become constituent unit in the year 1975 his claim for being absorbed on the post of Librarian would automatically vanish and in fact that is why the petitioner had remained silent till he had continued in active service upto year 1992 . For the first time, the petitioner came to this Court in the year 2004 by filing a writ petition, CWJC No. 1083 of 2004 by way of claiming payment of retirement benefit. It is actually in that retirement benefit case the petitioner had staked the claim that he should be given the pay-scale of Librarian of Rs.2000-3800/- and in 6 the light of general direction given by this Court dated 23.1.2004 of either paying the retirement benefit or deciding the claim of the petitioner that the Registrar of the University on examination of the service record of petitioner found that the salary of petitioner at the time of his retirement in the revised pay scale was Rs.1800- 3300/- and the same was fully in consonance with the earlier service history of the petitioner. A question would, therefore, arise, if the petitioner was given said pay-scale of Rs.1800-3300 on 1.1.1986 fixing basic pay at Rs.2280 was his writ petition filed in the year 2004 capable of reopening the dispute of the pay-scale of Rs.2000-3800/- w.e.f. 1.1.1986 ?. The answer will be obviously in negative inasmuch as such a stale claim for fixation of pay on the post of Librarian, a post on which the services of petitioner were never absorbed by the University was/is not admissible. That being so, there is no merit in this writ petition and accordingly the same is dismissed. kanchan (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)