IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.10538 of 2007 Krishna Deo Pandit, son of Satya Narayan Pandit, resident of Mohalla Pragati Nagar, P.O. New Mainpura, P.S. Danapur, District Patna … Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. The Secretary Department of Higher Education, Govt. of Bihar, New Secretariat, Patna 3. The Director, Higher Education, Patna 4. The Chancellor, Raj Bhawan, Patna 5. The Vice Chancellor Magadh University Bodh Gaya 6. The Vice Chancellor Veer Kuwar Singh University Ara 7. The Registrar, Magadh University, Bodh Gaya 8. The Registrar, Veer Kuwar Singh University, Ara … Respondents ---------------------------------- 3. 3.11.2011 No one appears for the petitioner. Counsel for the State is present. This case was earlier adjourned at the request of the learned counsel for the petitioner to enable him to file rejoinder to the counter affidavit. Today when the case has been called out neither the counsel for the petitioner is present nor any rejoinder to the counter affidavit has been filed. From the reading of the writ application and its relief in particular it comes clear that the petitioner has sought to raise an issue of revision of pay scale with effect from 27.3.1984 for which cause of action to the petitioner had emanated in between 1984 to 1989. The other relief also claimed by the petitioner for grant of pay scale at par with the employee of the Central Government with effect from 1.1.1996 is delayed by a period of more than ten years. The University in its counter affidavit has explained that the petitioner was earlier appointed on the post of Clerk/ 2 Typist on 27.3.1984 and that his appointment and continuance itself has been made subject matter of some enquiry. In that view of the matter, when the petitioner is only a non-teaching employee of Veer Kuwar Singh University, he cannot claim the benefit of salary as prescribed for the employees of the Central Government nor he can claim the prescribed pay scale of the post of Assistant from the date of his initial appointment. In any event the University is still said to be conducting enquiry as with regard to the petitioner vis-à-vis Mazhar Alam. In that view of the matter, while this Court would find it difficult to grant any relief to the petitioner, it would still direct the University to take a final decision in the pending enquiry as claimed in its counter affidavit. It is made clear that upon conclusion of such enquiry the University will take its final decision and extend the benefit in the matter of pay scale to the petitioner alike all other similarly situated persons. With the aforementioned observation and direction, this application is disposed of. (Mihir Kumar Jha,J.) Surendra/