IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.17521 of 2009 1. ANIL KUMAR JHA S/O LATE RAM KRIPAL JHA R/O BELOUN, P.S. BANERA, DISTT.- DARBHANGA 2. SHAILESH CHANDRA JHA S/O LATE SURENDRA NATH JHA R/O VILL.- KASAROUR, P.S. GHANSHYAMPUR, DISTT.- DARBHANGA 3. LAKSHMAN MISHRA S/O LATE PARAU MISHRA R/O VILL.- KHARAJPUR, P.S. BAHADURPUR, DISTT.- DARBHANGA 4. RAJENDRA CHOUDHARY S/O LATE NAGESHWAR CHOUDHARY R/O MOHALLA- AAJAM NAGAR, P.S. L.N.M.U. CAMPUS, DISTT.- DARBHANGA 5. HARISHANKAR JHA S/O SRI LATE YADUVIR JHA R/O VILL.- SEKHWAR, P.S.- MANIGHACHHI, DISTT.- DARBHANGA 6. MITHILESH KUMAR LAL S/O LATE LAKSHMI NARAIN LAL R/O VILL. AND P.S. MADHEPUR, DISTT.- MADHUBANI 7. SHYAM JHA S/O LATE YUGAL JHA R/O VILL.- HARIPUR, DIH. TOLA, P.S. KALUAHI, DISTT.- MADHUBANI 8. HARIMOHAN JHA S/O SRI DIWAKAR JHA R/O MANGARAUNI, P.S. RAJ NAGAR, DISTT.- MADHUBANI 9. SHYAMJEE JHA S/O LATE KALIKANT JHA R/O VILL.- SAURATH, P.S. RAHIKA, DISTT.- MADHUBANI 10. PHULDEO JHA S/O LATE BEDANAND JHA R/O VILL.- MAKUNMA, P.S. KHAJAULI, DISTT.- MADHUBANI 11. YOGENDRA CHOUDHARY S/O LATE CHATURBHUJ CHOUDHARY R/O VILL.- KANHAULI, P.S. MANIGACHHI, DISTT.- DARBHANGA 12. SATISH KUMAR SHARMA S/O LATE VISHWANATH PRASAD VISHWAKARMA R/O MOHALLA- BELA SHANKAR, P.S. LALBAGH, DISTT.- DARBHANGA 13. VIJAY KUMAR SINHA S/O LATE MANGAL PRASAD SINHA R/O VILL.- SHUBHANKARPUR, P.S.- TOWN, DISTT.- DARBHANGA 14. UMA NATH MISHRA S/O LATE KRISHNA MISHRA R/O VILL. DIP, P.S.- MADHEPUR, DISTT.- MADHUBANI 15. DHARMA NARAIN JHA S/O LATE AUGRAH NARAYAN JHA R/O VILL.- HARARI, P.S. ANDHARA THARHI, DISTT.- MADHUBANI 16. SUDHIR JHA S/O SRI LATE NAMESHWAR JHA R/O MOHALLA- BALBHADRAPUR, P.S.- LAHERIA SARAI, DISTT.- DARBHANGA 17. MANI MISHRA W/O LATE DHANPATI MISHRA, S/O LATE BAHAIRAV MISHRA R/O MOH. LALBAGH, P.S. DARBHANGA TOWN, DISTT.- DARBHANGA 18. JIWESHWARI DEVI W/O LATE SANTOSH KUMAR JHA R/O VILL.- PALIMOHAN P.S. KAJAULI, DISTT.- MADHUBANI 19. BINA DEVI W/O LATE RAM BILASH SAH R/O VILL.- HARI, P.S.- ANDHARA THARHI, DISTT.- MADHUBANI Versus 1. KAMESHWAR SINGH DARBHANGA SANSKRIT UNIVERSITY, THROUGH ITS VICE CHANCELLOR, DARBHANGA 2. VICE CHANCELLOR, KAMESHWAR SINGH DARBHANGA SANSKRIT UNIVERSITY, DARBHANGA 3. REGISTRAR, KAMESHWAR SINGH DARBHANGA SANSKRIT UNIVERSITY, DARBHANGA ----------- For the Petitioners : - Mr. Baidya Nath Thakur, Advocate Mr. Shankar Kumar Thakur, Advocate For the University : - Mr. S.S. Sundaram, Advocate 2 04/ 02.08.2011 Heard counsel for the petitioner and the counsel appearing for Kameshwar Singh Darbhanga Sanskrit University. There are 19 petitioners, whose prayer is for a direction to the Vice-chancellor and other authorities of Kameshwar Singh Darbhanga Sanskrit University to reinstate them on the post of Assistant, Typist and Routine Clerks (all Class III posts) with effect from the date of their termination i.e.19.6.2008. Petitioners no. 1 to 16 are Class III employees of Kameshwar Singh Darbhanga Sanskrit University. Petitioners 17, 18 and 19 are widows of Class III employees, who were terminated vide order dated 19.6.1998. The widows of Class III employees have joined this writ application for the benefits for which their husbands would have been entitled in case of their re-instatement, such as arrears of salary, consequential benefits, pension, pensionary benefits and for compassionate appointment, in case of death of their husbands. One more prayer has been made by the petitioners which relates to quashing of order dated 19.6.1998, whereby petitioners had been terminated by the respondent-authorities, in compliance of order passed in C.W.J.C. No. 793 of 1988. C.W.J.C. No. 793 of 1988 had been filed by one 3 Subhash Chandra Jha for quashing the order dated 25.1.1988 issued by Registrar of Kameshwar Singh Sanskrit University, Darbhanga, whereby 27 Class III employees, working on daily wages, had been regularized, on vacant sanctioned posts, in a regular scale. Writ application was allowed, considering the counter affidavit filed by the University holding that Private Respondents were not appointed against the posts falling within staffing pattern, as such order of regularization is not valid. The order passed in C.W.J.C. No. 793 of 1988 had been challenged by the Private Respondents/present petitioners initially by filing Civil Review No. 144 of 1998, which was dismissed, giving liberty to the petitioners for filing Letters Patent Appeal against the order passed in C.W.J.C. No. 793 of 1988. L.P.A. No. 446 of 1999 was preferred by the petitioners, which was allowed and the matter was remitted back to the Writ Court for passing fresh order in accordance with law, considering the observation made by the LPA Bench with regard to false affidavit filed on behalf of the University and its authorities before the Writ Court. Only because of false statement made in the counter affidavit filed by the respondent-university before the Writ Court, a finding was recording that Private Respondents were illegally 4 appointed against Class III posts falling beyond the staffing pattern. The notification through which present petitioners were absorbed/appointed on Class III posts, was quashed and as a consequence of the Court’s orders present petitioners were terminated from their service. An enquiry had also been conducted with regard to false statement made in the counter affidavit and it was found that going against the record, a false affidavit had been sworn, which resulted into quashing of the notification through which those petitioners were regularized/appointed against Class III posts falling with staffing pattern as per the decision of State Govt. Present writ application has been filed by the petitioners, as after remand of the matter by the LPA Bench to the Writ Court, a fresh order was passed, whereby the writ application was dismissed and so far petitioners, who were respondents in those writ application, were directed to be reinstated on their post as per the staffing pattern in the light of judgment and order passed in Braj Kishore Singh’s case. More than two years have passed, but the University was not taking any steps, Syndicate in its meeting held in March, 2009 authorized Respondent No. 2 to enquire and take administrative decisions in the matter relating to the 5 reinstatement of the petitioners. The Vice-chancellor constituted a committee consisting of Finance Officer (Welfare), College Inspector and Reader of one department to conducted enquiry, submit report so that appropriate action be taken. The Committee did not proceed to enquire into the matter, and till date no enquiry report was submitted. Despite several requests of the petitioners the direction of the Syndicate has not been complied. The Syndicate again in its meeting dated 14.8.2009, expressed its’ concern for not taking any administrative decision in the matters of reinstatement of terminated employees. The Syndicate discussed Proposal No. 16J of the minutes and unanimously resolved that expeditious decision must be taken for reinstatement, in the light of the order passed by the High Court. Despite all these developments, till date petitioners have not been reinstated in service. They have remained out of service since 1998, on account of fraudulent act of the University and its authorities, despite specific direction of the High Court in the writ application. In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of University, there is an admission that petitioners were terminated by mistake, on account of wrong and false 6 statement made in the counter affidavit by the then Law Officer. It has also been stated that the petitioners, who were initially appointed as daily wagers, were regularized and given promotion to Class III posts as per the policy decision of staffing pattern approved by the University and the State Govt. What I find that since 1998, for no fault on their part, petitioners are suffering. The Respondent-University has committed all kinds of illegalities, in connivance with its authorities. Even though, there is specific direction of the Writ Court, for reinstatement of all 27 terminated Class III employees, University is sitting silently, tight over the matter, instead of implementing the direction of the Court. Petitioners should have been reinstated, immediately after the disposal of the writ application, considering the fact that University itself had admitted that on account of false statement made in the counter affidavit, termination order had been issued. Petitioners were given promotion to Class III posts within the sanctioned posts under the staffing pattern of the University and the State. Their promotions were in accordance with the rules, statutes and the policy decision of the State Govt. There was no reason for not implementing the directions of the Writ 7 Court. In the counter affidavit also the University has not shown any eagerness to reinstate these petitioners, simply it has been stated that since the State Govt. has presently reduced the sanctioned strength of Class III employees University is facing problem in matters of reinstatement of Class III non-teaching staffs in the Colleges of the University. Admittedly, petitioners were regularized/appointed on Class III posts, approved by the State Govt. At the relevant time, there must have been budgetary allocation for employees absorbed against 27 Class III posts. The University now cannot take lame excuse regarding paucity of fund or approval from State Govt. Petitioners must be reinstated by the University by issuing necessary orders, within four weeks from the date of production/communication of this order. All petitioners shall be paid their current salary as well as arrears of salary. Since, petitioners had been regularized/appointed within the sanctioned strength, it is for the University to decide after holding proper enquiry that who are those Class III and Class IV employees, appointed beyond the sanctioned strength. So far payment is concerned, petitioners will be paid their current/arrears of salary as they will be reinstated against the sanctioned posts. 8 The University must comply the direction of this Court, as Respondents, otherwise also made themselves liable to face contempt proceeding by not complying the direction passed in the earlier Writ application. University will made requisition to the State Govt. for release of fund and the State Govt. will release requisite fund for making payment of arrears of salary to the petitioners. I.A. No. 896 of 2011 has been filed by Nityanand Jha for being impleaded as Intervenor-applicant. The grievance of this intervenor-applicant is similar to the writ application. He had also been terminated illegally by the University. As such, directions issued in respect of writ petitioners will also cover the case of Intervenor-applicant. Petitioner Nos. 17, 18 and 19 shall be paid arrears of salary payable to their late husbands, till the date of death, as well as all pensionary benefits. Petitioners will have option to apply for compassionate appointment of the legal heir of the deceased employees. DKS/ ( Mridula Mishra, J.)