IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.10062 of 2008 Vinod Singh, Son of Late Brahmdeo Singh, resident of village Kauriya, P.O. Eguna, P.S. Konch, District Gaya…………………………………………………………..Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Bihar through Secretary, Human Resources Development (Higher Education) Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 2. Vice Chancellor, Magadh University, Bodh - Gaya. 3. Head, Department of Geography, Magadh University, Bodh Gaya……………………………………….Respondents With Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.12507 of 2008 Ajmeri Khatoon, wife of Late Md. Jalaluddin resident of Village Loshinghani, P.S. Kauwakol, District Nawada……………………………………………………….Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Bihar, through the Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna. 2. The Principal Secretary, Department of Human Resources, Government of Bihar, Patna. 3. The Vice Chancellor, Magadh University, Bodh Gaya. 4. The Registrar, Magadh University, Bodh Gaya. 5. The Director, Higher Education, Government of Bihar, Patna. 6. The Head of the Department of Botany (P.G.) Magadh University, Bodh Gaya………………………Respondents ---------------- For Petitioner: Mr.Tej Bahadur Singh, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Rajesh Kr. Mishra, Advocate (In CWJC No. 10062/2008) For Petitioner: M/s N.A. Shamsi & Rashid Rais, Advocates (In CWJC No. 12507/2008). For University: Mr. Hans Raj, Advocate For the State: Mr. Neeraj Nandan, G.P. 20 3 30.08.2011 Heard learned counsels for the petitioners as well as learned counsel for the respondents. Petitioner of first case numbered as CWJC No 10062 of 2008 has superannuated as 2 Lab Incharge of the Magadh University on 30.06.2001 whereas petitioner of second case numbered as CWJC No.12507 of 2008 is widow of a deceased Lab Incharge of the University. They have moved this Court for a direction to the respondent-University to redesignate the concerned Lab Assistants, i.e. petitioner of first case and husband of petitioner of second case, as Demonstrators, in view of the Government letter no. 2P 8-41/2003-1115 dated 14.06.2006. They have relied upon an office order of the Registrar of the University issued under the orders of Vice-Chancellor dated 28.8.2006 as contained in Annexure-9 by which other Lab Technicians/Lab Incharge have been redesignated as Demonstrators from different dates mentioned against their names as they were found having requisite eligibility for being redesignated as Demonstrators on the said dates. Learned counsels for the petitioners point out that by this office order, redesignation has been ordered with retrospective effect and also to a deceased 3 employee. They have also referred to a common order of this Court passed in two writ applications numbered as CWJC Nos. 1377 and 9321 of 2010. They submit that by the said order dated 21.09.2010, under identical circumstance, a Bench of this Court allowed the writ application and directed the concerned persons to redesignate the petitioners of the cases as Demonstrators from the relevant dates. On the last occasion, learned counsel for the respondent-University informed this Court that the State Government has moved an appeal against the said order. However, today he has informed this Court that appeal of the State Government, numbered as L.P.A. No.981 of 2011, has been dismissed by a Division Bench by order dated 11.07.2011. Thus, the said order of the learned Single Judge stands affirmed by the Division Bench. It is not disputed that cases of the persons concerned in these two writ applications are squarely covered by the judgment of the learned Single Judge passed in the said two writ petitions which stands 4 confirmed by the Division Bench. In the circumstances, both the writ applications are also allowed in terms of the said judgment of the learned Single Judge dated 21.09.2010 and the respondent- University is directed to issue appropriate orders in accordance with law granting the same benefits to the petitioner of the first case and husband of the petitioner of the second case from the relevant dates. BT (J. N. Singh, J.)