IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.8900 of 2006 Bishwanath Singh, Son of late Awadh Behari Singh, Lab Bearer in Zoology Department cum Night Guard at Jagjiwan College, Ara, District Bhojpur. ---------- Petitioner Versus 1. The V.C., Veer Kuar Singh University at Ara. 2. The Principal, Jag Jiwan College, Ara, Post Chandwa, District Bhojpur. --------- Respondents ----------- 2 03.09.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and counsel for the Veer Kuar Singh University as also counsel for the Principal, Jag Jiwan College, Ara. The prayer of the petitioner in this writ application reads as follows:- “1. That this application is for issuance of a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction to the respondent as to why the petitioner be not promoted in class III with retrospective effect forthwith in the circumstances mentioned here- inafter.” Counsel for the petitioner would base the claim of the petitioner for promotion on a Class-III post on the basis of an order of appointment issued to him on 2.3.1977 by the Principal of the Jag Jiwan College, Ara, a constituent unit of Magadh 2 University and now of Veer Kuar Singh University. After 1976 Act came into force with effect from 31.12.1976, all appointment on a Class-III or Class-IV post in a constituent college could be made only by the Vice Chancellor and not by the Principal. This Court, therefore, would find that the very basis of the claim of the petitioner for his promotion on a Class-III post is on a rather weaker foundation, inasmuch as, his initial appointment itself was illegal. Learned counsel for the petitioner then would submit that persons similarly situated like the petitioner have been promoted from Class-IV to Class-III post. In the opinion of this Court, plea of discrimination is a plea of fact and when the persons, about whom discrimination is alleged have not been named nor made party to this writ application, this Court would find it difficult to go into all such vague plea of the petitioner. That apart, infact all the representations which have been filed by the petitioner as contained in Annexure-2 series 3 (Annexure 2/A to 2/G), this plea of discrimination was never raised by him by pointing out any specific case of such discrimination. That apart, when for the first time, in the legal notice on 17.9.2002, this plea was raised and the petitioner cited the case of Jai Kumar Ojha and Hari Shankar Prasad by claiming that they were promoted on the post of Clerk in Class-III post. The appointment of the petitioner as per the order issued by the Principal of the college was on the post of Laboratory boy cum Night Guard and therefore, if he was to be given his promotion, it could have been only in the cadre of his own and not in the cadre of Clerk. As a matter of fact, it also becomes apparent that when the petitioner was not given his promotion for want of vacant sanctioned higher post in his cadre, he was given the benefit of time bound promotion by the University letter no. 1273 G-1 dated 17.7.1990. Such time bound promotion was only introduced to compensate the loss to a person who cannot earn regular promotion. 4 In that view of the matter, this Court would find no merit in this writ application and the same is, accordingly, dismissed. Rsh (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)