IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.W.J.C. No.6768 of 2009 1. Raj Kumar Sah, S/O Late Ganesh Prasad Sah, r/o Hospital Road, Kahalgaon, P.O. + P.S. Kahalgaon, district Bhagalpur 2. Murlidhar Singh, S/O Late Ram Chandra Singh, r/o Muhalla Vikramshila Nagar, P.S. Kahalgaon Town and District Bhagalpur 3. Ramashray Mistri, s/o Late Ram Dhani Mistri, r/o Muhalla Purab Tola, P.S. Kahalgaon, district Bhagalpur .. Petitioners Versus 1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary (Higher Education), Human Resources Development Department, Government of Bihar, Patna 2. T.M. Bhagalpur University through it’s Vice Chancellor, Bhagalpur 3. Vice Chancellor, T.M. Bhagalpur University through it’s Vice Chancellor, Bhagalpur 4. The Registrar, T.M. Bhagalpur University, Bhagalpur 5. The Finance Officer, T.M. Bhagalpur University, Bhagalpur .. Respondents **** /2/ 23.06.2009 Heard the counsel for the petitioners, the State and the University. 2. Petitioners are the teachers working in T.M. Bhagalpur University. Petitioners are working as teachers in S.S.V. College, Kahalgaon, which is a constituent unit of T.M. Bhagalpur University. Prayer of the petitioners is for a direction to the respondent authorities of T.M. Bhagalpur University to submit a demand before the Principal Secretary, Higher Education, Human 2 Resources Development Department, Government of Bihar, calculating the actual expenditure burden for payment of arrears of difference of salary of the petitioners for the period 01.07.1982 to 31.12.1995 and 01.01.1996 to 31.07.2005. The petitioners have been forced by the respondent authorities for filing this writ application for the reason that though there is a statutory provision which is applicable in cases of all teachers working under the University, but, the respondents are considering the claim of only such teaching staff of S.S.V. College, Kahalgaon, who had earlier approached this Court by filing C.W.J.C. No. 3113 of 2009. That writ application was disposed off by order, dated 06.03.2009, with a direction to the Vice Chancellor of the University to adjudicate the claim of the petitioners for payment of arrears of salary. The University was directed to consider the grievance of the petitioners in terms of the statute and different orders issued by the Government from time to time, in this regard. Further, it was directed that on consideration of amount payable to the petitioners, it must be paid within a period of six months from the date of receipt of individual representations filed by each of the petitioners. Counsel for the petitioners submits that in the light of this order petitioners also wanted to submit their individual representations for consideration and adjudication, but, the University and it’s authorities are 3 considering cases of only those eighteen petitioners who approached this Court by filing writ application. This stand of University and it’s authorities is surprising. If there is statutory provision, equally applicable in case of persons, who have approached the High Court as well as persons who did not file any writ application, in that case similar treatment is required to be given to all without differentiating the case of one who has approached the High Court and one who has not approached the High Court. The petitioners’ claim should have also been calculated and considered regarding arrears of difference of salary by the authorities and making actual calculation requisition should have been sent to respondent no. 1 to sanction and make available necessary fund to the University. 3. Accordingly, this application is disposed off. Respondents 2 to 4 are directed to treat and consider cases of petitioners at par with the petitioners of earlier writ application in whose cases direction was issued by this Court. It is made clear that not only the present petitioners, but, other similarly situated persons cases should also be treated alike by the respondent authorities. Cp:2/S.A. (Mridula Mishra, J.)