IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.11073 of 2003 DR.CHANDRADEO SINGH, son of Late Bharat Raut, resident of village- Sirnisiswa, P.O Sirvi Bazar P.S Govindganj, District- East Champaran, at present- posted at Lalit Narayan Mithila University, Kameshwar Nagar, District- Darbhanga. … Petitioner. Versus 1. L.N.MITHILA UNIVERSITY, Kamehswar Nagar, District- Darbhanga, through its Vice-Chancellor. 2. the Vice Chancellor, Lalit Narayan Mithila University Kameshwar Nagar, Darbhanga. 3. The Pro-Vice Chancellor, Lalit Narayan Mithila University Kameshwar Nagar, Darbhanga. 4. The Registrar, Lalit Narayan Mithila University, Kameshwar Nagar, Darbhanga. 5. the Finance Officer, Lalit Narayan Mithila University, Kameshwar Nagar, Darbhanga. .. Respondents. ----------- 3. 24.09.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Uma Shankar Prasad Singh, learned counsel for L. N. Mithila University. At the outset, it must be recorded that this writ application has to be remitted back only because the University does not choose to file counter affidavit though a copy of such writ application was served on the counsel for the University on 14.10.2003 itself. 2 In this case, the prayer of the petitioner reads as follows: “A. For issuance of order/orders, direction/directions , writ/writs particularly in the nature of Mandamus for direction upon the respondents to pay the same pay scale (i.e. pay scale of Assistant) for the period of Nov. 2000 to June 2002, which had already been paid to the similar situated employees. The petitioner was getting the pay scale (1500-2750) of Assistant since from 14.6.83 and he received it till Oct. 2000. But suddenly from Nov. 2000, the petitioner was getting the pay scale (940-1360) of Routine Clerk instead of Assistant without any office order. (B) For in alternative issuance of order/orders, direction/directions, writ/writs particularly in the nature of writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ for quashing of the order (if any) by which the scale of the petitioner had been reduced for the period from Nov. 2000-June 2002. C. For direction upon the respondents to make payment of arrears of salary and D.A. for the period from March 1989 to Dec. 2002 amounting to Rs.2,96,893. D. For the direction upon the respondents to deposit the amount of Provident Fund of 31 months amounting to Rs.27,512/-, which has already been deducted from the salary of the petitioner and kept either with 3 the University fund or spent otherwise by the respondents.” As with regard to the aforementioned prayer when this Court would find that the petitioner was initially appointed on Class IV posts in the University and was allegedly given promotion on 21.12.1978 only on the post of Routine Clerk, the further promotion of the petitioner within a space of two and a half years of earlier promotion on the post of Assistant seems to be clearly against the Government decision requiring the minimum period of five years of Kalawadhi for promotion from the post of Routine Clerk to Assistant. This Court however would not like to put its final word as with regard to the said illegality in the promotion of the petitioner specially when it is only remitting the matter back to the respondent University. The Registrar of the University is directed to consider the grievance raised by the petitioner in 4 this writ application but then he would be at liberty, with the approval of the Vice Chancellor of the University, to look into the entire service history of the petitioner for deciding as to whether his earlier promotion on the post of Assistant on the basis of which the salary in the pay scale of Rs.1500-2750 has been claimed by the petitioner in this writ application is legally permissible. It is only when the authorities of the University will be satisfied that the promotion of the petitioner on the post of Assistant was validly given that they would take further a decision with regard to payment of arrears of salary to the petitioner in the pay-scale of Rs.1500-2750. If however it is found that the petitioner’s promotion on the post of Assistant was not valid, the decision of the University reducing payment of salary of the petitioner in the pay-scale of Rs.945-1360/- will not be disturbed. The petitioner in order to justify his claim 5 for payment of his arrears of salary in the pay scale of Rs.1500-2750 on the post of Assistant as raised in this writ application may file a compact representation along with all his evidence which would be disposed of by the Competent Authority of the University by a speaking order and if the petitioner is found entitled for any sort of amount, the same must be paid to him within a period of three months from the date of passing of such order. The entire exercise however must be completed by the competent authority of the University within a period of six months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. With the aforementioned observation and direction, this writ application is disposed of. kanchan/- (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)