IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.9697 of 2003 Aghmochan Jha, S/o late Nek Chand Jha, r/o Village Jaguar, P.S. Katra, District Muzaffarpur. -------- Petitioner Versus 1. B.R. Ambedkar Bihar University, Muzaffarpur through its Vice- Chancellor having its office in Muzaffarpur. 2. Vice-Chancellor, B.R. Ambedkar Bihar University. 3. Registrar, B.R. Ambedkar Bihar University, Muzaffarpur. 4. Finance Officer, B.R. Ambedkar Bihar University, Muzaffarpur. 5. Principal, J.B.S.D. College, Bakuchi, Katra Muzaffarpur. 6. Commissioner, Department of Finance, State of Bihar, Old Secretariat, Patna. 7. Commissioner, Department of Human Resources Vikash Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna. 8. State of Bihar. --------- Respondents ----------- 2 30.07.2010 Heard Mr. Rajni Kant Jha, learned counsel for the petitioner and counsel for the University as also counsel for the State. The prayer of the petitioner in this writ application reads as follows:- “1(i) That the respondents be directed to pay arrears of salary to the petitioner from 1.8.1988 to 12.1.1992 excluding the salaries of four months from November 1989 to February, 1990. (ii) That the respondents be directed to pay the arrears on account of difference in salary from 13.1.1992 to February 2001. (iii) That all the arrears be paid with a compound interest of 12% per annum. (iv) That a suitable cost be awarded 2 against the respondents and in favour of the petitioner.” Mr. Jha would straightway invite attention of this Court towards the order passed by the Vice Chancellor and communicated by the Registrar of the University dated 15.11.1995 (Annexure-4), wherein, the decision for payment of salary to the petitioner, holding the post of Lecturer in Economics, J.B.S.D. College, Bakuchi with effect from 1.8.1988, had been taken and therefore, he would submit that the payment should also have been made. Counsels for the State and the University have no instruction nor they have not filed any counter affidavit. Considering the fact that the petitioner’s services were absorbed under the statutes framed by the Chancellor and the Vice Chancellor had also taken a decision for making payment of salary with effect from 1.8.1988, there would not be any difficulty in holding that the petitioner was entitled for payment of salary in terms of such order as contained in Annexure-4. In fact, the University ought to have seen to it that the payment of salary of the petitioner in terms 3 of its order as contained in Annexure-4 had been made. That being so, this Court would now direct the Vice Chancellor of the University to ensure that such arrear of salary of the petitioner from 1.8.1988 to 12.1.1992, which has not been paid to the petitioner till date, must be paid to him within a period of three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. Any claim of the petitioner with regard to the difference of arrear of salary from 13th January 1992 to February, 2001 may also be examined strictly in accordance with law so that the necessary payment as admissible in law to be extended to the petitioner. Such an exercise, however, as indicated above, also must be completed within the aforesaid period of three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. With the aforementioned observation and direction, this application is disposed of. Rsh (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)