Patna High Court CWJC No.545 of 2009 (8) dt.26-08-2011 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.545 of 2009 ====================================================== Kamal Rai & Anr .... .... Petitioner/s Versus The State Of Bihar & Ors .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Anil Kumar For the Respondent/s : Mr. (Gp19) Mr. T.N.Maitin Mr. Nivedita Nirvikar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. MRIDULA MISHRA ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. MRIDULA MISHRA) 8 26-08-2011 Heard counsel for the petitioners, State and counsel appearing for L.N.Mithila University. Two petitioners have prayed for quashing of letter No. VCR-1875/07 dated 25.11.2007 issued under the signature of the Registrar, Lalit Narayan Mithila University, Kameshwar Nagar, Darbhanga, whereby claim of petitioner no.2 for regularization in service on IV post of Night Guard has been rejected by the three Men Committee constituted by the Vice Chancellor, L.N.Mithila University, Kameshwar Nagar, Darbhanga. The Committee had been constituted for for considering claim of daily wagers for regularization of their service in compliance of order passed in CWJC No. 5774 Patna High Court CWJC No.545 of 2009 (8) dt.26-08-2011 of 2000 and analogous cases and petitioner no.2’s claim was rejected arbitrarily by a cryptic order without giving any cogent reasons. So far petitioner no.1 is concerned, his case has not been considered for regularization and he has been given an opportunity for the same. Petitioners’ prayer is for a direction to the respondents to regularize them on Class IV posts of Night Guard in R.B.College, Dalsingh Sarai, where the petitioner no.1 is working since 1.3.1982 and the petitioner no.2 is working since 8.6.1983. Both the petitioners were appointed on daily wages in the year 1982 and 1983 by an order of the Principal of R.B.College, Dalsing Sarai. They worked continuously about 240 days without any break, as such the Principal of the College recommended their names for regularization to the Deputy Secretary, L.N.Mithila University in the year 1988 but no action was taken, as such again vide letter No. 207 dated 7.10.1993 Principal recommended their names for regularization as there was requirement of Class IV employees against the unsanctioned post. Petitioners’ case is that there is a provision for regularization of those employees who have worked for one year in letter No. 14705-771 dated 30.3.1971. Despite all these facts, no action was taken by the respondent Patna High Court CWJC No.545 of 2009 (8) dt.26-08-2011 University. Counsel for the petitioners submits that the Human Resources Development Department had also issued a letter contained in Memo No. 14/D/107//89 M 894 dated 11.7.1989 issued under the signature of Additional Commissioner Cum Special Secretary, Bihar Patna, addressed to all the Vice Chancellor of the University with regard to fixation of service on basis of fixed staffing pattern of employees of colleges and University appointed on unsanctioned post. This letter has been issued by the Government on the basis of agreement in between the Government and Bihar State University and College Employee Mahasangh signed on 26.4.1989. The Government, in the light of the agreement decided for preparation of a panel under staffing pattern after an inquiry a request was made to the Vice Chancellor of University for not making any fresh appointment, unless employees already working on sanctioned post and absorption against such posts in order of seniority. Petitioners’ claim was that similarly situated daily wagers have been considered for absorption and they have also been regularized but so far petitioners are concerned, their case has been rejected and no cogent reason has been Patna High Court CWJC No.545 of 2009 (8) dt.26-08-2011 assigned. The University has filed its counter affidavit stating that both the petitioners were appointed by the Principal without any approval of the Vice Chancellor on casual basis. Since there was no approval of the University and they were working against non-existent post, their claims have rightly been rejected by the three men Committee. The Principal is not empowered to make any appointment under the Bihar State University Act, 1976. The Vice Chancellor of the University is only competent authority to make appointment to the posts within sanctioned grades and scales of pay and within sanctioned strength of ministerial staff and other servants of the University.As such it is a clear case of violation of Section 10(6) and Section 35 of the Bihar State Universities Act, 1976. Since the petitioners did not come within the categories meant for absorption, as such their claim was rejected by the threemen committee, providing proper opportunity to appear and place material in support of their claim. So far petitioner no.1 is concerned, he did not appear before the Three Men Committee. Claim of petitioner no.2 was rejected by the Three Men Committee and finding that his appointment was contrary to the provisions of Section 10(6) Patna High Court CWJC No.545 of 2009 (8) dt.26-08-2011 and 35 of the Bihar State Universities Act. Since appointment itself was not in consonance with the provisions under the Act as well as the petitioners’ claim could not have been allowed. Considering the submissions made by the parties, I find that proper opportunity was provided to the petitioners to bring material in support of claim for regularization. The Three Men Committee has rejected their claim. Considering the statutory provisions and the material on record, I do not find any illegality in the order impugned. The writ application stands rejected. Arun Kumar/- (Mridula Mishra, J)