IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.10164 of 2003 ANIL KUMAR TIWARI Son of Ram Suresh Tiwari, resident of village Kuddi Via Hatta, District Kaimur (Bhabua). Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. The Vice Chancellor, Vir Kuer Singh University Arah. 3. The Secretary, Bihar College, Service Commission, Boaring Canal Road Patna-1. 4. The Governing Body through its Secretary, Maharana Pratap Mahavidayalaya Mohania District Kaimur. 5. The Principal, Maharana Pratap Mahavidyalaya Mohania District Kaimur. 6. Vir Kuer Singh University through its Registrar Arah District Arah. ----------- 3 17.09.2010 Heard counsel for the petitioner and counsel for the Vir Kuer Singh University. Prayer of the petitioner in this writ application reads as follows:- “That this is an application for issuance of an appropriate writ order or direction including a writ in the nature of Mandamus for direction to concerned authority issue appointment letter and subsequently by Respondents to accept the Joining of the petitioner in the light of recommendation letter dated 23.9.2002 bearing no. 189 issued by the Secretary, Bihar College Service Commission, Bihar contained in Annexure 6 and 7 and for issuance of an appropriate writ order or direction as the petitioner is found entitled to.” Counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is working in Maharana Pratap College since 2.7.1992 and when the governing body of the College, an affiliated College of Vir Kuer Singh University, had also advertised the posts through the College Service Commission vide Advertisement No.1287 of 1994 the petitioner had not only appeared in such selection before the College Service Commission but his name was duly recommended by the Commission vide letter dated 2 23.9.2002, but the governing body of the College had taken no step for appointing the petitioner on such post in terms of requisition and advertisement. Counsel in this context has also placed reliance on a communication of the College submitted to the University, wherein name of the petitioner has been shown as Lecturer of Sanskrit with all his details including date of appointment dated 2.7.1992, but there is endorsement in the remarks column that his case is pending before the High Court. Counsel has therefore apprehension that the governing body of the College having not acted in terms of the recommendation made by the College Service Commission the petitioner may be deprived from the usual benefit which is available to every Lecturer appointed on the recommendation by the College Service Commission. Strictly speaking, prayer made in this writ application for a direction to the governing body of an affiliated college which is not a State' within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution, would not be maintainable but then it has to be also be kept in mind that the petitioner has been working in the College since 1992 and if there is also recommendation of the College Service Commission in his favour dated 23.9.2002 that has to be given due weightage for all purposes including fulfillment of requirement under section 57 of the Bihar Universities Act. In that view of the matter, this Court would direct the University to look into this aspect of the matter and do the needful 3 even if it would require the University to issue a direction to the affiliated College to get the recommendation of the College Service Commission dated 23.9.2002 considered by the governing body for regularization and appointment of the petitioner. The University, it must be noted, is not powerless in this regard keeping in view the provisions made under section 59 of the Bihar State Universities Act governing the relationship of the affiliated College with the University. With the aforementioned observations and directions this application is disposed of. Abhay Kumar ( Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)