IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.8153 of 2003 1. SAKAL DEO YADAV son of Mahanthi Yadav, resident of village and Post Marukia, P.S. Khajauli District- Madhubani. 2. Digambar Rai son of late Babulal Rai, resident of village and Post Pilakhbar Mauza Mangrauni, P S. Rajnagar District- Madhubani… Petitioners. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. The Commissioner, Department of Higher Education, Government of Bihar, Patna. 3. The Assistant Additional Secretary, Department of Higher Education, Government of Bihar, Patna. 4. The Vice-Chancellor, Lali Narayan Mithila University, Kameshwar Nagar, Darbhanga. 5. The Registrar, Lalit Narayan Mithila University, Kameshwar Nagar, Darbhanga. 6. The Principal, Ram Krishna College, Madhubani… Respondents. ------------- 4. 09.08.2010 Heard counsel for the petitioners and counsel for the University. The prayer of the petitioners in this writ petition reads as follows:- “1. That this is an application for issuance of a writ of Mandamus or an appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the respondents to pay both the petitioners their due salary from 3.1.2002 till now including the dearness allowance, petitioner no. 1 his complete due salary from 10.2.1996 to 5.3.97, balance due salary from 6.3.97 to 28.2.01 and balance due salary for Sundays and holidays, and petitioners no. 2. his balance due salary from, 10.2.96 to 28.2.2001 and/or pass any other order/orders which may be deemed fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.” With regard to the aforementioned prayer, 2 Mr.Vishwanath Prasad Singh, learned senior counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are continuing in service since long as Class IV employee on daily wages. Such appointment was terminated in the year 1994 but then they were subsequently reinstated with effect from 10.2.1996 whereafter though their joining was accepted and work was also started to be taken from them, their payment of remuneration on daily wages was not restored despite the Principal making repeated requisition from the University for release of fund. Mr. Singh would also clarify that though for some period payment has been made to the petitioners during the pendency of this writ application but the full payment has not been made to them as yet. In a dispute of this nature where the payment of salary from day to day and month to month is being claimed filing of the counter affidavit could have been really helpful. However, the University is in habit of not filing its counter affidavit. In such a situation, this Court would direct the Registrar of the University to make verification of the claim of the working of the petitioners on the basis of 3 absentee statement submitted by the Principal of the College and if it is found that the petitioners have continued to work and their services have not been terminated they would be at least entitled for payment of salary till the date they have continued or would continue in service on the same conditions of remuneration on which they were engaged. It goes without saying that if any enhancement on daily wages or D.A. has been made by the University in the interregnum period, the benefit of the same will also be extended to the petitioners if it has already been extended to other daily wages employee. Payment of such remuneration on daily wages to the petitioners however will not in any way become a support to their claim of being regularized in service for which the University must follow the mandate of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. Such exercise with regard to payment of wages to the petitioners must be completed by the Registrar of the University within a period of three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order and in the event any portion of claim of the petitioners is 4 rejected the Registrar of the Universities will assign reasons for the same in his order. With the aforementioned observation and direction, this writ petition is disposed of. kanchan/ (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)