IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.8437 of 2003 RAMJEE SINGH, S/O LATE PHULESHWAR SINGH, R/O BIKRAM ENGLISH, P.O.-KHAURARICHA, P.S.- SHIKROL LAKH, DISTRICT-BUXER, AT PRESENT POSTED AS PEON IN GENERAL SECTION-C, UNIVERSITY OFFICE, VEER KUNWAR SINGH UNIVERSITY, ARRAH. ………………PETITIONER. Versus 1. VEER KUNWAR SINGH UNIVERSITY, ARRAH, THROUGH ITS VICE-CHANCELLOR. 2. THE VICE-CHANCELLOR, VEER KUNWAR SINGH UNIVERSITY, ARRAH. 3. THE REGISTRAR, VEER KUNWAR SINGH UNIVERSITY, ARRAH. 4. THE FINANCE OFFICER, VEER KUNWAR SINGH UNIVERSITY, ARRAH. 5. THE STATE OF BIHAR, THROUGH THE SECRETARY, HIGHER EDUCATION, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA. ………………RESPONDENTS. For the Petitioner : Mr. Sunil Kumar Kumar Singh, Adv. For the Respondents: Mr. Vinay Kirti Singh, Adv. ----------- 4 13.01.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the University. Petitioner in this writ application has prayed for a direction to the respondents to pay his arrears of salary from March, 1999 till date and pay his current salary on month to month basis and further direction for payment of his difference of salary from 25.1.1997 to February, 1999. The facts of the case have been admitted in the counter affidavit which has been 2 filed by the then Registrar of the University. The following statements made in the counter affidavit gives a clear picture with regard to status of the petitioner in the University:- “3. That, the petitioner Ramji Singh was appointed against the vacant sanctioned post of Peon on daily wage basis @ Rs.21.90 per day remuneration vide letter no. 1552/GI/94 dated 9.7.1994.” “8. That, the Regularization and Absorption Committee recommended for absorption and regularization of his service on 25.1.1997.” “9. That, on the recommendation of Absorption and Regularization Committee the service of the petitioner was made regular from 25.1.1997 vide office letter no. R/162/2000 dated 16.3.2000.” “12. That, the State Government issued letter bearing no. 1080 dated 23.7.1998 addressed to the Registrars of the Universities, communicating its decision not to take work from the daily wages non- teaching employees and to remove them without any delay. The government also took into account that services of the employees who were working on daily wages were regularized even without post.” “15. That, in the light of the State Government letter no. 1080 dated 23.7.1998 payment of the salary of the petitioner was withheld from March 1999 because his appointment was made after 10.5.1986 and without approval of the State Government. It is relevant to state that the State 3 Government vide Memo No. 989 dated 10.5.1991 took a resolution that employees who were working prior to May 1986 even beyond staffing pattern will continue so until they are adjusted against vacancies occurring in future.” “16. That, in the light of the Governor Secretariat letter no. VKSU 18/99-129/GI(1) dated 15.1.2001 the services of daily wages employees of university office, P.G. Department and constituent colleges were terminated but the service of the petitioner was not terminated as his service condition was different to daily wages employees.” (emphasis supplied) The above statements made in the counter affidavit, duly sworn by the Registrar, shows that the petitioner was no longer working on daily wages and his services were duly absorbed by the University as a regular employee on the recommendation of the Absorption and Regularization Committee dated 25.1.1997. In paragraph 16 as quoted above, it has been specifically averred that the services of petitioner was not terminated as “his service condition was different to daily wages employees.” Thus, it is apparent that the University is treating the petitioner as a 4 regular employee having been duly absorbed on the recommendation of the Committee. In these circumstances, the respondents can not escape from the liability of payment of salary of the petitioner. The writ application is, therefore, allowed. The respondent University is directed to release payment of salary of the petitioner from March 1999 till date and pay his current salary. The arrears of salary shall be paid to the petitioner within three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. The University, if necessary, shall obtain necessary permission from the State Government in the light of this order. Arvind/ (J. N. Singh, J.)