IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.7078 of 2004 SMT.PREMLATA PRAKASH w/o Dr. Bimal Prakash, resident of Prakash House, Baderghat, P.S. Alamganj, P.O.- Gulzarbagh, Town and District- Patna. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR through its Secretary, Higher Education, Patna. 2. The Secretary, Higher Education, New Secretariat, Patna. 3.The Magadh University Bodh- Gaya through its Registrar. 4.The Vice Chancellor, Magadh University,Bodh- Gaya. 5. The Finance Officer, Magadh University,Bodh- Gaya. 6. The Principal, R.P.M. College (Rameshwar Das Panna Lal Mahila College), Chowk Shikarpur, Patna City, District- Patna. ----------- 9 25.4.2011 The petitioner had come to this Court with a simple grievance. According to her the amount that was due under various heads, as found by the University itself payable to her up to 1998 was Rs. 2,59,409/- in respect of which an amount of Rs. 57,482/-was paid. As per University a balance amount of Rs. 2,01,927/- was the balance payable. The matter having been recommended to the State Auditors. They examined the matter and according to them the amount payable was only Rs. 1,02,484/- . The claim to the extent of Rs.99,443/- was disallowed and shown as savings in government account. As if the Auditors were sent to save government money and not calculate legitimate due. If one refers further to the reasons given by the Auditor they are more astounding. There are only two grounds on which the amount has been denied payable. First , with regard to initial pay scale of the Reader upon implementation of the 5th Pay Revision and the fitment of salary on completion of five years as a Reader with effect from 1.1.1996.This Court in C.W.J.C.No,.18532 of 2009, disposed of on - 2 - 5.7.2010 held that the approach of the Auditors was wrong and clarified the whole situation, still Auditor fix his gun ignoring the judgment of this Court, which has attained finality. Second is with regard to the shift of date of payment from 11.12.1979 to 28.2.1982 in view of order in CWJC No.5859 of 1996.This decision of the State to shift the date has already been stayed by this Court long before . The auditors came to this finding but has been ignored . In view of the aforesaid and there being no further affidavit from the Sate in spite of repeated orders, this Court has no option but to direct the University to clear full payments of the petitioners by making further payment of Rs. 99,443/- within a period of one month from today. The State would be obliged to reimburse this amount to the University. Once is made by the University to the petitioner. Both these deductions, for the reasons, as noticed above, are unsustainable. I order accordingly. Timely payment shall be the responsibility of the Registrar of the University concerned. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the writ petition is disposed of. singh (Navaniti Prasad Singh,J)