IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.14074 of 2003 1(A) ANANDADITYA AGASTYA ONKAR (B) Vedatiya Agastya Nirankar, Both sons of Late Dr. Poddar Arun Shashtri (C) Bharti Kumari, daughter of Late Dr. Poddar Arun Shashtri, All residents of Agastya Sadan, Gami Tola, Police Station and District Katihar. … Petitioners. Versus 1. THE V.C.,B.N.MANDAL UNIVERSITY, Lalu Nagar, Madhepura 2. The Finance Officer, B. N.Mandal University, Lalu Nagar, Madhepura. 3. The Secretary to the Govt. Department of Finance, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 4. The Secretary to the Govt. Department of Higher Education, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 5. The Joint Secretary to the Govt. Department of Higher Edcuation, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 6. the Principal, R.D.S. College, Shalmari, Katihar. 7. The Lalit Narayan Mithila University, through its Registrar, Kameshwar Nagar, Dharbhanga. 8. The Bihar University Service Commission, through its Chairman, Patna. … Respondents. ----------- 8. 28.07.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State. Though initially in this writ petition the prayer was made as follows:- “(I) For holding that the husband of the petitioner late Dr. Poddar Arun Shastri, who was duly promoted to the post of University Professor with effect from 1.2.1985 under 16 years Time Bound Promotion Scheme and was paid his salary etc. in the scale admissible to the post of University Professor at the relevant time till his death in July 1994, can not be shown as Lecturer in the pay verification Chart issued by the Govt. and thereby reduced the benefits to the petitioner. (ii) For commanding the 2 respondents to make necessary correction in the pay verification Chart in respect to the husband of the petitioner (Dr. Poddar Arun Shastri) and showing him as University Professor restore the benefits of the same to the husband of the petitioner including the payment of arrears of difference etc. on various dates. (iii) For holding that the husband of the petitioner was entitled to three increments on and from 1.4.1975 as Ph.D./Research allowance which was directed to be added to his salary with effect from 1.4.1975 by Govt. letter dated 10.3.1978 and by not doing so the late husband of the petitioner and after his death, the petitioner has been denied her rightful claim. (iv) For commanding the respondents to make payment of arrears of difference of salary etc. by adding three increments to the salary of the late husband of the petitioner with effect from 1.4.1975 and fit him in all the corresponding revised pay on the basis of the addition of these three increments with effect from 1.4.1975 from time to time and make payment of the arrears of the same to the petitioner. (v) for commanding the respondents to make payment of arrears of due salary which admittedly is due since December 1980 amounting to Rs.2,13,605.13 or even more with interest at the market rate to the petitioner. (vI) For commanding the respondents to calculate and pay the petitioner the entire dues payable to her late husband including the difference of payment because of his having been wrongly shown as Lecturer in the Pay Verification Chart, not adding three increments with effect from 1.4.1975 and the admitted dues of the salary with effect 3 from December 1980 and make calculation on the basis of the salary which the petitioner would have been entitled after making necessary correction as aforesaid.” learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that part of the such grievance of the petitioners has been ventilated and redressed during the pendency of this writ petition but then the question of entitlement of the father of the petitioners (the original petitioner) would be under serious zone of consideration inasmuch as even though the father of the petitioners had died in harness by holding the post of University Professor, the University in absence of recommendation of the University Service (Constituent College) Commission had treated him to be only a lecturer. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that now when the Commission has been abolished its job has been handed over to the University itself, the decision with regard to actual entitlement of the father of the petitioners needs to be considered and decided by the University itself. B. N. Mandal University has filed a counter affidavit wherein the entire burden has been sought to be 4 shifted to Lalit Narayan Mithila University under which the father of the petitioners was working prior to the college being placed under the control of B. N. Mandal University. In that view of the matter, this Court would direct the authorities of the L.N Mithila University to decide the entitlement of the father of the petitioners for the post of University Professor and if it is found that he was entitled to the same in terms of the relevant statute, an order to this effect would be passed by the L. N. Mithila University whereafter the necessary consequential admissible payment would also be made to the petitioners on the basis of their being the legal heirs of deceased employee by the authorities of B. N. Mandal University. Let it be however made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merit of the case and it shall be open for the University to decide such claim of the father of the petitioners strictly in accordance with law. Such exercise however must be completed by the L.N. Mithila University and B. N. Mandal University within a period of six months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. 5 With the aforementioned observation and direction, this writ petition is disposed of. kanchan (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)