IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.12958 of 2000 CHHABILA YADAV Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- For the petitioner: Mr. A.C.Jha, Advocate. For the University: Mr Anil Singh, Advocate. For the State: Mr. Lakmesh Marind. J.C. to S.C.20 09 16.10.2008 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the Tilka Manjhi University, Bhagalpur. Petitioner claims that by annexure-1 dated 31.03.1980 issued by the Principal of Sunderwati Mahila College, Bhagalpur he was appointed to the post of Electric Mistry for Sunderwati Mahila college hostel. His grievance is that after 31.08.1999 he is not being paid any salary. The stand of the university in the counter affidavit and supplementary counter affidavit filed in the office on 01.10.2008 is that the Principal was not a competent authority to make appointment on a class III post as claimed by the petitioner and that such a post of Electrician for hostel of the College was never sanctioned by any competent authority. With the help of Annexure-10, it was submitted on behalf of the petitioner that in the year 1977 the Vice Chancellor delegated the power to the Principal of the constituent Colleges to make appointments to the 3rd & 4th grade post. However, learned counsel for the university has rightly pointed out that the delegation is conditional and it mentions that such appointments by Heads of the Department/ Principal of the colleges will be subject to the approval - 2 - of the Vice-Chancellor/Syndicate. It has been stated on behalf of University that no approval of the Vice-Chancellor/Syndicate was ever granted in favour of petitioner’s appointment. Next contention on behalf of the University is that in absence of validly created post the University could not have provided the necessary funds nor asked for the same from the State Government and hence the require remedial action was taken leading to the stoppage of salary to the petitioner. No doubt, the petitioner has continued to receive monetary benefits for a long period on the basis of appointment ordered by the Principal of the College on a non sanctioned post. However, in the facts of the case, this court, finds itself unable to grant any relief to the petitioner in the absence of availability of any sanctioned post. Hence, the writ petition is dismissed. In case, any equivalent post dully sanctioned exists in the College or in the University and petitioner is found eligible for appointment to such post then his case may be considered sympathetically along with cases of other eligible persons. For this purpose, if necessary, petitioner may be granted relaxation in age for the years he has worked in the college. Sym ( Shiva Kirti Singh, J.)