IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.18421 of 2009 1. BINAY KUMAR PATHAK S/O LATE BODH KRISHNA PATHAK R/O-NAYA NAGAR, WARD NO.13, SUPAUL, P.S-SUPAUL, DISTT- SUPAUL AT PRESENT HEAD OF DEPARTMENT OF BOTANY CUM CO-ORDINATOR BIOTEHNOLOGY, B.S.S. COLLEGE, SUPAUL Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE PRINCIPAL SERETARY, HIGHER EDUCATION, HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT, GOVT. OF BIHAR 2. THE VICE CHANCELLOR, B.N.M.U. LALOO NAGAR, MADHEPURA 3. THE REGISTRAR, B.N.M.U. LALOO NAGAR, MADHEPURA 4. THE PRINCIPAL, B.S.S. COLLEGE, SUPAUL ----------- 5. 22.01.2010. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, State and the counsel for the University. 2. Petitioner is aggrieved by the order of the Principal, Bharat Sevak Samaj College, Supaul dated 19.12.2009, Annexure-3, whereunder he has been directed to superannuate with effect from 31.12.2009 after attaining the age of 62 years. The challenge to the aforesaid order is made on the ground that the aforesaid order is contrary to the directions of this Court contained in order dated 6.10.2009 passed in the case of Professor Dr. Jagdish Pd. Sharma & Ors. Vs. State of Bihar, reported in 2009 (4) PLJR 680, whereunder it has been held that the age of superannuation of the University/College teacher is extended from 62 years to 65 years in the light of the decision of the University Grants Commission to extend the age of superannuation of the University/College teacher from 62 to 65 years in terms of the provisions contained in - 2 - University Grants Commission Act, 1956. According to learned counsel such decision is ipso facto applicable to the University/College teachers serving in the State of Bihar in terms of the provisions contained in Bihar State Universities Act, 1976 and decision to the contrary contained in order dated 19.12.2009, Annexure-3 be quashed. 3. Counsel for the State has opposed the prayer and submits that the decision of this Court in the case of professor Dr. Jagdish Pd. Sharma (Supra) will not have any application to the case of the petitioner as till date the Government notification in terms of the provisions contained in Bihar State Universities Act, 1976 has not been issued by the State Government and thus, the decision of the High Court in the case of Professor Dr. Jagdish Pd. Sharma (Supra) will not have any application to the case of the petitioner. Further, it is submitted that against the judgment of this Court in the case of Professor Dr. Jagdish Pd. Sharma (Supra) the State authorities have filed Letters Patent Appeal challenging the correctness of the said judgment and this Court should not dispose of the writ petition in the light of the aforesaid judgment. 4. Counsel for the petitioner submits that till date the Letters Patent Appeal has not - 3 - been numbered as it is defective and it is not known when the appeal shall be heard because the appeal has been filed only by way of delaying tactics on the part of the State. 5. Having heard counsel for the petitioner, State and the University, I am of the view that the decision of the Principal of the College dated 19.12.2009, Annexure-3 shall be subject to the result of the Letters Patent Appeal which the State has filed against the judgment rendered by this Court in the case of Professor Dr. Jagdish Pd. Sharma (Supra). In case the Letters Patent Appeal filed against the aforesaid judgment fails, counsel for the State and the University has agreed that petitioner shall be allowed salary and other consequential benefits with effect from 1st January, 2010 and in the light of such undertaking recorded at the instance of the counsel for the State and the University I dispose of this writ application with direction that the case of the petitioner shall be subject to the result of the aforesaid Letters Patent Appeal. P.K.P. (V.N.Sinha,J.)