IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.11368 of 2006 Dr. Md. Shahid Hassan, S/o Md. Zahurul Hassan, resident of village Shakerpur, P.O. Bharwara, P.S. Singhwara, District Darbhanga. -------- Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Bihar through Chief Secretary, Govt. of Bihar, Old Secretariat Building, Patna. 2. The Commissioner-cum-Secretary, Human Resource Development Department (Higher Education), Bihar, Patna. 3. The L.N. Mithila University, through its Registrar, Kameshwar Nagar, Darbhanga. 4. The Vice-Chancellor, L.N. Mithila University, Kameshwar Nagar, Darbhanga. 5. The Registrar, L.N. Mithila University, Kameshwar Nagar, Darbhanga. 6. The Finance Officer, L.N. Mithila University, Kameshwar Nagar, Darbhanga. --------- Respondents ----------- 3 29.09.2010 Having heard learned counsel for the parties as with regard to the following relief prayed in this writ application filed on 14.9.2006 :- “1(i) For commanding the Respondents to pay arrears of salary and difference of pay to the petitioner amounting to Rs. 8,29,641/- in the nature of (a) arrears of salary for the period April 1986 to October, 1986 amounting to Rs. 13,097/- (b) the difference of pay from November, 1986 to December, 1995 amounting to Rs. 1,91,166/-, (c) the difference of pay on account of revised UGC pay scale with effect from 1.1.1996 till February, 2005 amounting to Rs. 6,75,378/- (i.e. 2 the total arrears of salary and difference of salary under un- revised pay scale and revised UGC pay scale is Rs. 8,79,641/- out of which the Respondents have paid Rs. 50,000/- to the petitioner on 12.7.2006).” this Court is of the considered opinion that as the petitioner claims that his service has already been approved by the Justice S.C. Agarwala Commission and also consequently regularized by the University in terms of Section 4(14) of the Act, the decision for payment of his consequential payment of salary by way of difference of salary ought to have been taken by the University. It is also claimed by the petitioner that similarly situated Teachers of R-1 category of Justice S.C. Agrawal Commission Report have already been paid their difference of salary after their order of regularization passed by the University in terms of the direction given by this Court. The difficulty, however, for this Court is that the University as usual in a space of last four years since filing of this case has not filed its counter affidavit and, therefore, this Court has to proceed on the 3 basis of statements made in this writ application. Such habit of the officials of University of not filing counter affidavit is not only deplorable but, infact, directly causes impediment in the dispensation of justice and in a given case, the University officials may be now hauled up for committing contempt of this Court. Recording such warning, this Court would direct the Vice-Chancellor of the University to look into the grievance of the petitioner and take a final decision as with regard to the payment of his difference of salary within a period of three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. It goes without saying that the Vice Chancellor of the University shall not reject the case of the petitioner on any frivolous ground including lack of fund, inasmuch as, the claim of the petitioner that the similarly situated persons have already been paid their difference of salary has not been disputed. if however, the Vice-Chancellor of the University for any other valid and/or 4 cogent reason would still choose to reject the aforesaid claim of the petitioner either in whole or in part thereof, he will be obliged to assign and communicate his reasons for the same by a speaking order in the same period. It further goes without saying that if the petitioner is found entitled for such payment of difference salary, the payment thereof shall also be made to the petitioner within the aforementioned period itself. With the aforementioned observations and direction, this application is disposed of. Rsh (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)