IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.6323 of 2007 Subodh Mandal, Son of Sri Muneshwar Mandal, Resident of Kalgiganj, P.S. Kahalgaon, District Bhagalpur. --------- Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Bihar through the Special Secretary, Department of Human Resources Development, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 2. Tilaka Manjhi, Bhagalpur University, Bhagalpur through its Registrar. 3. The Registrar, Tilakmanjhi, Bhagalpur University, Bhagalpur. 4. The Vice-Chancellor, Tilakmanjhi, Bhagalpur University, Bhagalpur. 5. The Principal, Shankar Sah, Vikramshila Mahavidalaya Kahalgaon, Distt. Bhagalpur. ------------ Respondents ----------- For the Petitioner :- Mr. B.P. Pandey, Sr. Adv. Mr. P.K. Sinha, Adv. Mr. S.C. Giri, Adv. For the State :- Mr. G.P. 5 For the University :- Mr. A. K. Keshri, Adv. 2 09.08.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and counsel for the Bhagalpur University as also counsel for the State. The prayer of the petitioner in this writ application reads as follows:- “1. That by this writ petition the petitioner prays for issuance of a writ/writs, direction/directions to the respondents to allow the petitioner the scale of pay of the class III employees of the college who is working on the post of store keeper way back from 1.5.80. The post is sanctioned and according to the staffing pattern.” With reference to the aforementioned prayer, learned counsel for the petitioner 2 would submit that the college of the petitioner, Shankar Sah Vikramshila Mahavidalaya, Kahalgaon became constituent unit of Bhagalpur University in the year 1980 and from that day, the services of the petitioner were also taken over as a Class-4 employee when the fact remains that the petitioner was already promoted on the post of Store Keeper by the private management prior to the College being made constituent unit of Bhagalpur University. On that basis, the petitioner claims his payment of salary of a Class-III post in place of his present payment being made on a Class-IV post. No counter affidavit has been filed by the respondent University in this case and the counter affidavit filed by the State is only by way of completing the formality. The issue, in fact, appears to be as to whether the promotion of the petitioner by the Governing Body of the affiliated college was a valid promotion in terms of Section 35 of Bihar State University Act so as to be recognized by the University in the context of Section 4(1)(14) of the Bihar State 3 University Act 1976 or by any competent authority after the college was made constituent. There also appears to be some dispute as with regard to the admissibility of a duly sanctioned post in terms of the Staffing Pattern of 1981 inasmuch as a mere provision made in the Staffing Pattern of a post of Store Keeper would not be enough unless the State Government, in keeping with the requirement of the college and the number of students reading in the college, had specifically sanctioned such a post of Store Keeper on which the petitioner is said to have been promoted by the Governing Body of the affiliated college and working till date. Counsel for the petitioner would, however, submit that while the petitioner’s promotion has not been recognized by the University right from the date of takeover of the college for the purpose of payment of salary, he still continues to work on the post of a Store Keeper in the college and a person junior to him, namely, Panchanan Thakur whose services were also alike him taken over as a class-IV employee has been 4 allowed promotion by the University on a Class-III post without considering the case of the petitioner. In the opinion of this court the statement contained in paragraph no.18, if it be correct, would definitely require the University to re-consider the case of the petitioner for grant of promotional benefit. This Court, however, must make it clear that the prayer of the writ petitioner in this writ application for payment of arrears of salary from 1980 on the promotional post cannot be allowed, inasmuch as, the writ application came to be filed on 14.5.2007 i.e. after twenty-seven years of the cause of action. In that view of the matter, even if the petitioner would be found entitled for grant of promotion on the post of Storekeeper his promotional benefit will only flow from the date of filing of the writ application i.e. 14.5.2007. Subject to the aforementioned observation and direction that the petitioner will not be entitled for any monetary benefit till the date of filing of this writ 5 application, the petitioner’s case for promotion on the post of Store Keeper be considered in accordance with law by the University and if it is found that any junior to him including one, namely, Panchanan Thakur was given such promotion by discriminating the petitioner in the matter of grant of promotion on a Class-III post, the petitioner’s promotion would be also dated back to the date of promotion of Panchanan Thakur or any other junior to him but then the financial benefit of such promotion as noted above will only flow from 14.5.2007. If there be, however, no sanctioned post available for Store Keeper but then there has been sufficient work of the Store Keeper as per the staffing pattern dated 16.8.1981, on which the petitioner has continued to work, it would be also open for the University to make a recommendation to the State Government to sanction the post of Store Keeper in terms of the Staffing Pattern and if the State Government sanctions such post of Storekeeper in the college it will be liable to release fund for payment of the 6 salary of the said post of Store Keeper only from 14.5.2007 in case the petitioner is held entitled for such promotion. With the aforementioned observation and direction, this application is disposed of. Rsh (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)