IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA MJC No.1560 of 2005 RAM BALAK CHAUDHARY Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 09/ 05.5.2008 Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. During the pendency of this contempt application, retiral dues of the petitioner, who superannuated as Librarian while serving in the L.N. Mithila University with effect from 31.3.2004, has been paid, but quantum thereof is being disputed. Accordingly, for such dispute of quantum, petitioner is directed to represent before the Vice- Chancellor, L.N. Mithila University, who shall consider the claim and pass appropriate order in accordance with law within 30 days from the date of receipt of the representation and if any further amount is found due to the petitioner, the same should be paid as early as possible, in any case within one month from the date of the order passed by the Vice-Chancellor. 3. So far claim of the petitioner for payment of the arrears of salary for the period prior to 1.1.1986 in the pre-revised scale, which salary was paid to him at the relevant time by way of ad hoc grant, is concerned, it is submitted on behalf of the University that payment, which is said to have been released vide different letters as indicated in chart appended as Annexure-A to the supplementary show cause filed on behalf of opposite party no.1 today is not sufficient to release such arrears to the petitioner as thereunder the required amount for payment of the arrears of salary in the pre-revised scale to petitioner and others prior to 1.1.1986 has not been released, as such, it is not - 2 - possible for the University to release such arrears of salary to the petitioner as in terms of the Universities Act, it is the State Government, which has to release the fund and thereafter payment has to be made by the University to its employees. 4. The Secretary, Higher Education Department, who is present in Court, states that further amount for payment of the arrears of salary to the petitioner for the period prior to 1.1.1986 cannot be released unless audit report is received and the University be directed to cooperate in early submission of the audit report. Audit of the accounts of the University is the concern of the State Government and the State Government is authorized to take appropriate action against the University and its functionaries for receipt of the early audit report. It is none of the business of this Court to expedite the audit of the accounts of the University at the instance of the Government. This Court is only concerned with the payment of the entitlement of the petitioner, but as the payments are not being released by the State Government on account of non-receipt of the audit report from the University, I deem it expedient to direct the petitioner as also the Secretary, Higher Education Department and the Registrar of the University to appear before His Excellency the Chancellor where it should be sorted out that the amounts required for payment of the arrears of salary to the petitioner for the period prior to 1.1.1986 has been released or not and if not released then the said amount be released within a reasonable time, in any case within one month from the date of appearance of the parties before His Excellency the - 3 - Chancellor. The date for appearance should also be fixed within a reasonable time so that the entire arrears of salary of the petitioner for the said period is paid within a reasonable time. 5. The Secretary, Higher Education Department should approach His Excellency the Chancellor for a suitable date for the appearance of the parties before His Excellency and communicate the same to the Registrar, who in turn will communicate to the petitioner. 6. This contempt application is, accordingly, disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to initiate action for contempt if the pre- retiral dues is not paid to the petitioner within a reasonable time. Arjun/ (V.N. Sinha, J.)