IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.7475 of 2007 Arun Kumar, son of late Bulkan Ram, resident of Sabji Bagh near Blue Diomand Hotel, P.O. Bankipore, P.S. Pirbahor, District Patna … Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Bihar through its Secretary cum Commissioner, Higher Education, New Secretariat, Bihar, Patna 2. Deputy Secretary, Higher Education, new Secretariat, Bihar, Patna 3. Vice Chancellor, Magadh University, Bodh Gaya, Gaya 4. Registrar, Magadh University, Bodh Gaya, Gaya 5. Finance Officer, Magadh University, Bodh Gaya, Gaya 6. Principal, J.D.Women’s College, Bailey Road, Patna … Respondents ---------------------------------- 9. 23.9.2011 Heard Mr. Gautam Saha, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Anil Kumar Sinha, learned counsel for Magadh University and Mr. Anjani Kumar Sinha, learned counsel for the State. The prayer of the petitioner in this writ application reads as follows: “That this writ petition has been filed for direction upon the respondents, particularly the respondent nos. 1 and 2 to make necessary correction/ modifications as per entitlement in the dates as mentioned in the chart, so far as dates with respect to the petitioner is concerned, enclosed alongwith the letter bearing No. 2/p8-09/04 H.E. 907 dated 22.5.2004 issued by the respondent no.2 and addressed to respondent no.4, by which wrong dates have been illegally, arbitrarily and malafidely mentioned in the said chart with respect to the petitioner. This writ petition has also been filed, for direction upon the respondents, to make payment of arrears of salary, due since 1.4.1981 till date, caused due to promotion of the petitioner, to the post of Junior 2 Selection Grade scale of Laboratory Bearer i.e. Laboratory Boy, in the scale of Rs. 425-605/- with effect from 1.4.1981 and Senior Selection Grade scale of Laboratory Boy, in the scale of Rs. 950- 1400/- with effect from 1.4.1984 as well as successive revisions of the scales in view of the recommendations of successive Pay Revision Commissions etc., as per the entitlement of the petitioner, alongwith appropriate rate of interest. This writ petition has also been filed for direction upon the respondents to produce all relevant records including the calculation sheet/ chart regarding the case/ entitlement of the petitioner before this Hon’ble Court, for its perusal and consideration in the interest of justice and fairplay. This writ petition has also been filed for holding that the petitioner is legally entitled, for the payment of arrears of salaries, alongwith appropriate rate of interest.” Mr. Saha, learned counsel for the petitioner, had initially referred to the orders of this Court dated 26.8.2009, 7.11.2009, 4.1.2010, 27.1.2010, 26.2.2010 and 8.3.2010 basically to contend that despite repeated directions the Government or the University was not in a position to explain the anomaly in the pay fixation chart of the petitioner holding the post of Laboratory Boy ever since 4.12.1975, inasmuch as he was shown to be in the same pay scale with effect from 1.1.1986, 1.1.1996 and 1.4.2000 i.e. Rs. 950-1400. This Court having noted the aforementioned submission and in fact there being no satisfactory explanation on 3 behalf of either the State Government which had issued the pay fixation statement, as contained in Annexure 1, or by the University which had implemented the same, the Director of Higher Education and the Registrar of the University were asked to appear in person to explain it. The Registrar of the University for his personal reason has not appeared but has sent his representative and therefore, the prayer for his exemption for appearance in view of the affidavit filed on his behalf is hereby allowed. The Director, Higher Education, however, has explained that the pay scale of the petitioner as on 1.1.1986 of Rs. 950-1400 has been revised to Rs. 2610-3540 with effect from 1.1.1986 and that the petitioner will also be entitled for any further revision of the said pay scale of Rs. 2610-3540. He has further explained that the pay fixation chart was issued in the month of May/ July, 2004 whereas the Government decision with regard to grant of pay scale of Rs. 2610-3540 with effect from 1.1.1996 was notified in the year 2005 and therefore, the said discrepancy could not be taken case of. It is really said that such a simple issue could not be explained by the learned counsel for the Respondents by filing a clear affidavit. Be that as it may, this Court would find that the pay fixation statement of the petitioner, in view of the stand taken by the Director of Higher Education, has to be revised in terms of the latest revision made by the State Government. This Court would direct the Director of Higher Education to issue a fresh revised pay 4 fixation statement of the petitioner. At this stage Mr. Gautam Saha would like to expand the scope of the writ petition for also claiming promotion in Senior Selection Grade of the post of Laboratory Boy and its consequential benefit by way of enhanced salary. He has also tried to distinguish the concept of time bound promotion and the promotion under the Junior Selection Grade and would explain that once the petitioner was granted Junior Selection Grade he cannot be put into the pay scale of time bound promotion. This aspect is completely foreign to the limited prayer in the writ petition, which as noted above was basically for correction of pay fixation statement issued by the Government, as contained in Annexure 1. This writ application, therefore, is disposed of with a direction to the respondent Director of Higher Education and the Registrar of the University to ensure that a fresh revised pay fixation statement is issued to the petitioner clarifying his pay scale and if the petitioner finds himself aggrieved by way of such pay fixation statement it will also be open for him to represent the case before the Vice Chancellor of the University who will then taken his decision strictly in accordance with the Government Rules and regulations with regard to pay fixation and of course in accordance with law. As with regard to payment of arrears of salary this Court must clarify that the petitioner’s claim from 1.1.1981 is not being allowed by this Court, inasmuch as the petitioner will only 5 be entitled to claim any arrears of salary which was withheld on account of wrong pay fixation made in the year 1994. In this regard this Court has to take into account the statement produced by the counsel for the University showing the detail of arrears of payment made from July, 1982 to December, 2005 to the tune of Rs. 49,793/- which is said to have been paid to the petitioner by way of arrears from July, 1982 to December, 2005. Mr. Saha would however immediately react to such payment by asserting that the total claim of the petitioner was to the tune of Rs. 6,43,062/- and it could not have been slashed and scaled down to Rs. 49,793/-. In the opinion of this Court these aspects of the matter relating to accounting and entitlement of the petitioner can be also gone into by the Registrar of the University, who is now having help and support of a Government Auditor for scrutinizing the entitlement of all such University employee. Therefore, if the petitioner would file his representation claiming the arrears of salary for any further amount beyond Rs. 49,793/- for the period July, 1982 to December, 2005, it would be gone into by the Government Auditor posted in the University and in the light of the report submitted by the Government Auditor, the Registrar of the University will pass his final order and communicate to the petitioner. It goes without saying that if the petitioner is found entitled to any further amount, in view of the report of the Government Auditor, the same shall also be paid to the petitioner in next three months of passing of such order by the Registrar of 6 the University. With the aforementioned observation and direction, this application is disposed of. The personal appearance of the Director, Higher Education and the Registrar of the Magadh University is dispensed with. (Mihir Kumar Jha,J.) Surendra/