IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.12420 of 2002 1. RAJESHWAR PD.VISHWAKARMA, son of late Ram Sunder Vishwakarma, Resident of Mohalla Nabiganj, P.O. Chapra, P.S. Bhagwan Bazar, District Saran 2. Tulsi Prasad Singh, son of late Sheo Charan Singh, Resident of Mohalla Dahiyawan Tola, P.O. Chapra, P.S. Chapra Town, District Saran 3. Man Singh, son of late Raghu Nandan Singh, resident of Mohalla Dahiyawan Professors Colony, P.O. Chapra, P.S. Chapra Town, District Saran 4. Prof. Krishna Kant Dwivedi, son of Kamla Kant Dwivedi, resident of Mohalla Dahiyawan Professors Colony, P.O. Chapra, P.S. Chapra Town, District Saran … Petitioners Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. The Commissioner & Secretary, Human Resources Division Department State of Bihar, Patna 3. The Director Higher Education, Human Resources Development Department, Bihar, Patna 4. Jay Prakash University, Chapra through its Registrar 5. The Vice Chancellor, Jay Prakash University, Chapra 6. The Registrar, Jay Prakash University, Chapra … Respondents ----------- 3. 17.8.2010 Heard counsel for the petitioners and the counsel for J.P.University as also the State. The prayer of the petitioners initially when this writ application was filed, read as follows: “(i) To issue a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to discharge their legal obligation to make payment of ad-interim reliefs to the petitioners as per policy decision of the State Government 2 which is similarly applicable in the case of the petitioners in terms of statutes of Bihar State Universities Act, 1976. (ii) To issue a further writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to make payment of arrears of interim relief (2nd instalment) at the rate of 10% of basic pension with minimum of Rs. 50/- for the period 1.4.1995 to 31.3.1997 in accordance with Finance Department resolution no. 213 dated 9.1.1998 and further to make payment of arrears of interim relief at the rate of 20% of the basic pension (3rd instalment) in accordance with Finance Department resolution no. 3578 dated 25.3.1998 w.e.f. 1.4.1997 respectively as contained in Annexure 1 and 2 to this petition. (iii) To issue a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to make payment of interim relief (1st instalment) w.e.f. 1.4.1995 to 30.6.1998 which was granted to the petitioners at the rate of Rs. 50/- per month in accordance with Government resolution contained in Memo no. 5082 dated 5.9.1996 but in case of petitioners payment of the same was started at the rate of Rs. 50/- per month with effect from 1.7.1998. 3 (iv) To issue a further writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to pay the petitioners medical allowances admissible in law which have not been paid to them in wholly illegal and arbitrary manner. (v) To issue a further writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to pay interest at the rate of 18% per annum on the entire dues amount of interim relief and medical allowances since the date the amount has become due till the date of their final payment.” Counsel for the petitioners, however, at the out set in view of very clear Government decision as with regard to non-admissibility of interim relief or interim allowance as fully explained in Annexure „A‟ to the counter affidavit, the letter of the Higher Education Department of the Govt. of Bihar dated 18th January, 2008 providing, inter alia, that in the revised pay scale neither deferred D.A. nor interim relief is admissible to the Universities employees, has not pressed that part of the relief claiming either interim relief or deferred D.A. Counsel for the petitioners, however, would submit that as the other 4 employees in other Universities had been given medical allowance at the rate of Rs. 50/- per month (subsequently enhanced Rs. 100/-), the petitioners would also be entitled for payment of such medical allowance. In this context he relies on certain notifications of the Magadh University dated 13.9.2002 or Tilka Manjhi Bhagalpur University dated 5.5.2006 and B.R.A.Bihar University dated 28.11.2006. The said supplementary affidavit having been filed only in this Court today and a copy served on the counsel for the University also today, he is not in a position to explain the same in absence of instructions. Normally such supplementary affidavit should not be taken on record, especially when the case is called out for hearing but then as the interest of justice would require in this case to direct the respondent J.P.University to consider the grievance of the petitioners only with regard to admissibility of the medical allowance, the supplementary affidavit filed by the petitioners today is taken on record. One thing is clear from the reading 5 of the aforementioned notifications that such medical allowance has been sanctioned by different Universities with effect from 1.3.2002 to the pensioners in case of Magadh University and to the working employees of Bhagalpur University with effect from April, 2005 and to those employees of the Bihar University and pensioners with effect from November, 2006. It would, therefore, be wholly unsafe for this Court to hold as to from which period the petitioners, having retired from the service with effect from 31.1.1995, 31.1.1998, 31.12.1993 and 31.12.1998 respectively, would be entitled for payment of medical allowance especially when there is no order of J.P. University alike of three Universities as annexed in the supplementary affidavit. In that view of the matter, this Court would direct the petitioners to approach the University by filing their individual separate representation for payment of medical allowance and the Registrar of the University with the prior approval of the Vice-Chancelllor in keeping 6 with the precedent cases of other Universities as also the Government decision for this purpose would take a final decision with regard to admissibility of medical allowance and communicate the same to the petitioners. It is made clear that barring the claim of medical allowance nothing else in respect to the petitioners will be looked by the University and the said claim of medical allowance if allowed in the case of the petitioners from any specific date as has been and/or will be made applicable in the University in other similar cases would also entitle them to receive consequential monetary benefit within three months of the receipt/ production of a copy of this order along with the individual representation to be filed by the petitioners. With the aforementioned observation and direction, this application is disposed of. (Mihir Kumar Jha,J.) Surendra/