IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.4074 of 2004 1. TEACHERS ASSOCIATION,B.M.COLLEGE, RAHIKA MADHUBANI THROUGH ITS SECRETARY, SHAMIM AHMAD, SON OF LATE FAIZ MOHAMAD, READER DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS, B.M. COLLEGE, RAHIKA, MADHUBANI. 1.A. LAXMINATH JHA, SON OF LATE BALKRISHNA JHA, READER (RETD.). 2. ATTIGAULAH KHAN, SON OF LATE SHAIDUL HAQ KHAN (RETD. READER OF POL. SC.). 3. CHANDESHWAR NARAIN SINHA, SON OF LATE KAMLA PRASAD SINHA (RETD. READER, DEPARTMENT OF MATH). 4. HARISHANKAR JHA, SON OFLATE NARAIN DUTTA JHA, READER DEPARTMENT OF ENGLISH, NOW TRANSFERRED TO R.K COLLEGE, MADHUBANI. 5. PREM CHANDRA JHA, SON OF LATE RADHA KANT JHA RETD. REDER OF GEOGRAPHY. 6. KAKPILESHWAR SAHA, SON OF LATE ISHWARI LAL SAHU, RETD. READER, DEPARTMENT OF HINDI. 7. VAKIL PRASAD SINGH, SON OF LATE BAIDYANATH SINGH, READER IN PSYCHOLOGY. 8. UMESH CHANDRA CHAUDHARY, SON OF LATE KRISHNANDAN CHAUDHAY, READER, DEPARTMENT OF PHILOSOPHY, NOW TRANSFERRED TO J. N. COLLEGE, MADHUBANI. 9. DR. SURENDRA LAL DAS, SON OF LATE JAIDEO LAL DAS, READER, DEPARTMENT OF HISTORY. 10. GAGADHAR MISHRA, SON OF LATE BALKRISHNA MISHRA, READER, DEPARTMENT OF SANSKRIT. 11. CHAKRADHAR JHA, SON OF LATE CHANDRAKANT JHA, READER, DEPARTMENT OF MAITHILL. 12. RAMADEO MAHTO, SON OF LATE RAMAWATAR MAHTO, READER, DEPARTMENT OF ZOOLOGY. 13. DR. MADAN MOHAN PRASAD, SON OF LATE RADHIKA PRASAD, READER, DEPARTMENT OF PHYSICS. 14. MOHAN RAUT, SON OF LATE LARCHO RAOUT, READER, DEPARTMENT CHEMISTRY. 15. ARUN CHANDRA JHA, SON OF LATE DR. DEVENDRA JHA, READER, DEPARTMENT OF SOCIOLOGY. 16. CHIRANJEEV JHA, SON OF LATE CHATURBHUJ JHA, READER, DEPARTMENT OF SOCIOLOGY. 17. BHOGENDRA JHA, SON OF LATE CHANDRAKANT JHA, READER, DEPARTMENT OF MAITHILI. 18. DR. REWATI RAMAN CHAUDHARY, SON OFLATE BADRI NARAIN CHAUDHARY, READER, DEPARTMENT OF HISTORY. 19. JAGDISH JHA, SON OF LATE BAMBHOLA JHA, READER, DEPARTMENT OF HINDI. 2 20. SMT. SUDHA JHA, WIFE OF LATE BINODANAND JHA, LECTURER, DEPARTMENT OF GEOGRAPHY, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE-RAHIKA, P.0. + P.S. RAHIKA, DISTRICT- MADHUBANI. 21. RAM SHARAN PANJIAR, SON OF LATE HARINANDAN PANJIAR, LECTURER, DEPARTMENT OF MATH, NOW TRANSFERRED TO R.K. COLLEGE, MADHUBANI. 22. BIRENDRA NATH JHA, SON OF LATE KRISHNA KANTH JHA, RETD. LECTURER, DEPARTMENT OF PHILOSOPHY. 23. DEO NARAIN MISHRA, SON OF SRI PARSURAM MISHRA, LECTURER, DEPARTMENT OF ENGLISH. 24. ABDUL RAUF ANSARI, SON OF LATE ADBULGATOOR, LECTURER, DEPARTMENT OF URDU. 25. KSHITISH KUMAR, SON OF RAJDEO PRASAD, LECTURER, DEPARTMENT OF BOTANY, NOW READER. DEPARTMENT OF BOTANY. 26. JAI KRISHNA JHA, SON OF LATE HARISHCHANDRA JHA, DEMONSTRATOR, DEPARTMENT OF ZOOLOGY. 27. INDRA KANT MISHRA, SON OF LATE RANGI MISHRA, DEMONSTRATOR, DEPARTMENT OF PHYSICS, NOW LECTURER. 28. BAIDYANATH THAKUR, SON OF BALDEO THAKUR, DEMONSTRATOR, DEPARTMENT OF CHEMISTRY. 29. SHAMIM AHMAD, SON OF HAZI JAMIL AHMAD, DEMONSTRATOR, DEPARTMENT OF BOTANY, NOW LECTURER. ALL PETITIONERS ARE TEACHERS EXCEPT PETITIONER NO. 20, B.M. COLLEGE, ROHIKA, MADHUBANI, DISTRICT- MADHUBANI. ………PETITIONERS. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR. 2. COMMISSIONER-CUM-SECRETARY, HIGHER EDUCATION GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA. 3.VICE-CHANCELLOR, L.N.M.V. KAMESHWAR NAGAR, DARBHANGA. 4.REGISTRAR, L.N.M.U. KAMESHWAR NAGAR, DARBHANGA. 5.FINANCE OFFICER, L.N.M.U. KAMESHWAR NAGAR, DARBHANGA. 6.PRINCIPAL, B.M COLLEGE RAHIKA, DISTRICT, MADHUBANI. ……….RESPONDENTS. ----------- 09/ 22.11.2010 Having heard counsel for the parties as with 3 regard to following relief; “That petitioners have come for issuance of appropriate writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to pay the basic Pay, Dearness Allowance, House Rent Allowance, Medical Allowance, Deferred D.A., Old D.A difference of pay (Basic Pay Old) etc. amounting Rs. 33,35,432.90 ( Rupees Thirty Three Lacks thirty five thousand four hundred thirty two and ninty paise) which due for the payment of Teachers of B.M College, Rahika, Madhubani”. and a specific stand taken by the respondents in the light of Annexure-A to the counter affidavit dated 02.08.2009, showing payment of more than the claimed amount in para-12 of the writ application to have already been paid to the petitioner, this Court would find it difficult to keep on monitoring the future entitlements of the members of petitioner Association including petitioners 1A to 29 which has become payable to them on account of their continued service in the College and the University concerned. As a matter of fact, learned counsel for the petitioner had tried to make out a case by placing 4 reliance on consolidated chart contained in Annexure- 5 to show that as on 24.12.2008, the petitioners and other teaching staffs were entitled for certain more amount which do not seem to have been paid in full as disclosed in Annexure-A to the counter affidavit. This Court however in exercise of its power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India would refuse to indulge in job of accountancy. The petitioners' grievance at the time this writ petition was filed on 21.04.2000, was only with regard to payment certain amount and admittedly that amount has been paid. It is also not correct to suggest that the Government is releasing consolidated fund on month to month basis for payment of salary and emoluments and inasmuch as such grants is made available only by of release of fund either twice or thrice to the University to run its administration as also to make payment of salary. Thus the petitioners cannot claim payment on month to month basis unless the whole system for release of fund to the Universities in Bihar by the State Government is itself changed. True it is, that the State Government has also released its fund as per the budgetary provision made by the University on year to year basis and therefore, if there has been any amount already 5 released by the Government to the University which has not been paid to the petitioners till date that only can be said to be a fault error or latches on the part of University. No such case however, has been made out by the petitioners and therefore this Court would find it difficult to issue a direction for payment of up to date salary as claimed in course of oral submission made by Mr. Satish Chandra Jha on the basis of the consolidated statement dated 24.12.2008 contained in Annexure-5 to the supplementary affidavit to writ application, which is definitely a subsequent event not totally related to the prayer made in this writ application. It however, goes without saying that if the petitioners are entitled to get their monthly salary they must be paid the same to which they are entitled in law. The petitioners for this purpose will have liberty to file their individual separate claim and the competent authority of University would be obliged to give individual reply to the petitioners by making it clear as to what amount has already been paid or has been withheld on account of paucity of fund and/or any other reason. Such an exercise however, must be completed by the competent authority of the University within a period of 6 months from the date 6 of filing of the individual and separate representation by the petitioners. With the aforementioned observations and direction this writ application is disposed of. Ranjan (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)