IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.1542 of 2010 1. YUGAL KISHORE SINHA S/O LATE ISHWAR PRASAD SINHA R/O VILL-NANDWARA, P.S BAIRGANIA, DISTT- SITAMARHI Versus 1. THE V.C.,BABA SAHEB BHIMRAO AMBEDKAR BIHAR UNIVERSITY, MUZAFFARPUR 2. THE RGISTRAWR, BABA SAHEB BHIMRAO AMBEDKAR BIHAR UNIVERSITY, MUZAFFARPUR 3. THE SECRETARY, GOVERNING BODY, BIRCHAND PATEL SMARAK COLLEGE, DESARI, DISTT- VAISHALI 4. THE PRINCIPAL BIRCHAND PATEL SMARAK COLLEGE, KESARI, DISTT- VAISHALI 5. SRI RAMAN KUMAR S/O NOT KNOWN LECTURER (PSYCHOLOGY) BIRCHAND PATEL SMARAK COLLEGE, DESARI, DSITT- VAISHALI 6. SRI AMOD KUMAR SINGH S/O NOT KNOWN LECTURER (PSYCHOLOGY) BIRCHAND PATEL SMARAK COLLEGE, DESARI, DSITT- VAISHALI ----------- For the Petitioner : Mr.Ashok Kumar Sinha, Sr.Adv. Mrs.Mala Ambastha and Mr. Santosh Kr. Singh. For the University : Mr. Ajay Behari Sinha. 2 23.7.2010 Petitioner claims to be a teacher in Psychology in Biharchand Patel Smarak College, Desari, District- Vaishali . There were other teachers in that faculty as well . It is not in dispute that there are only two posts of Lecturers in Psychology sanctioned by the University and the State Government in the said College , which College is an affiliated College of Baba Saheb Bhimrao Ambedkar Bihar University, Muzaffarpur. When the matter of confirmation came, the names were sent by the College. The University Service Commission approved the panel showing clearly petitioner as second in the second position sanctioned. This was way back in 1998. Thereafter the Ad hoc Committee made appointment where again the petitioner was not considered but that decision of the Ad hoc Committee - 2 - was apparently set aside by the Governing Body of the College under intimation to the university on the ground that University’s representative was not present. Ultimately, now Syndicate of the University had granted approval to two Lecturers in Psychology and the petitioner did not figure therein. The two Lecturers to whom approval has been granted are the first position holder for the two sanctioned posts as per recommendation of the University Service Commission, which stood dissolved in 2007. It is submitted that the recommendation of the College Service Commission made in the year 1998 could not have been acted upon by the University in the year 2009. Petitioner claims appointment. Learned counsel for the University has pointed out that for settlement of his grievance petitioner has to move the Chancellor, who would be in better position to examine the records of the University and take a decision at the first instance in the matter. This Court therefore requests the Chancellor to take up the matter in relation to the petitioner and decide the same in accordance with law at the earliest preferably within a period of three months from the date of production of a copy of this order before the Officer on Special Duty in the Secretariat of Chancellor. With the above observations and directions, the writ application stands disposed of. singh (Navaniti Prasad Singh,J)