IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.12910 of 2010 RAM NATH PRASAD SINGH S/O LATE RAM SAKAL SINGH R/O VILL.-SINGAHI,P.O.-BHAGWATPUR,P.S.-PAROO,DIST.- MUZAFFARPUR. VERSUS 1. BHIM RAO AMBEDKAR BIHAR UNIVERSITY,MUZAFFARPUR THROUGH ITS REGISTRAR. 2. THE VICE-CHANCELLOR,BHIM RAO AMBEDKAR BIHAR UNIVERSITY ,MUZAFFARPUR. 3. THE REGISTRAR , BHIM RAO AMBEDKAR BIHAR UNIVERSITY ,MUZAFFARPUR. 4. THE PROCTOR,BHIM RAO AMBEDKAR BIHAR UNIVERSITY,MUZAFFARPUR. ----------- 02 03.09.2010 The petitioner alleges that his service was accepted as Librarian become a constituent College in B.R. Ambedkar, Bihar University, Muzaffarpur. His pay was statutorily fixed by the Pay Revision Committee of the University and notified as such. On some enquiry having been set up, the petitioner was ordered by the Vice- Chancellor to be treated as Assistant Librarian with effect from date of conversion of the College into constituent unit of the B.R. Ambedkar, Bihar University, Muzaffarpur and, consequently, his pay scale was also reduced. This was done in the year 2006 and since then petitioner has been representing but the matter is not being decided. On 31.07.2010 petitioner has superannuated and because of this order of 2006 his arrears of salary and other dues are stuck up. Petitioner submits firstly that upon the petitioner’s College becoming constituent the Pay Revision Committee of the University considered his case and having found him qualified and fit to be treated as a Librarian declared him a Librarian and, accordingly, fixed his pay. The Statutory Committee of which the Vice-Chancellor - 2 - and Registrar are also member cannot be subsequently revised, much less, by the Vice-Chancellor. Petitioner further submits that he had the necessary qualification to be a Librarian, the post of Librarian being sanctioned, he was rightly taken to be Librarian. In my view, it is better that the Vice-Chancellor decides the matter giving reasons as to why once the Pay Revision Committee and the University decided the matter almost two decades back and its revision was also accepted by the University as far back as in 1988, now after two decades what has changed and further whether the Vice- Chancellor alone is competent to sit in judgment over the order of the Pay Revision Committee of which he is also a member. Petitioner’s representation is pending, petitioner may file a fresh representation giving all details to the Vice-Chancellor. The Vice-Chancellor would consider the same and giving reasons pass appropriate orders on all the issues including the issues as noted above within a period of one month from the date of filing of representation and communicate the same to the petitioner as well. The Vice-Chancellor while deciding the matter would not be prejudiced by the subsequent orders that have been issued, the validity whereof he himself has to re-decide. With these observations, the writ petition is disposed of. Trivedi/ (Navaniti Prasad Singh, J.)