IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CIVIL WRIT JURISDICTION CASE NO.14777 OF 2006. AJAY KUMAR SINHA, SON OF LATE DR. RAMESH CHANDRA SINHA, RESIDENT OF 403, ANUGRAHPURI COLONY, P.S.- RAMPUR, P.O.- ANURAHAPURI COLONY, GAYA. .... .... PETITIONER VERSUS 1. MAGADH UNIVERSITY, BOTH GAYA THROUGH ITS VICE-CHANCELLOR. 2. THE REGISTRAR, MAGADH UNIVERSITY, BODH GAYA. 3. BIHAR STATE UNIVERSITY (CONSTITUENT COLLEGES) SERVICE COMMISSIONER, PATNA THROUGH ITS CHAIRMAN. 4. THE SECRETARY, BIHAR STATE UNIVERSITY (CONSTITUENT COLLEGES), SERVICE COMMISSIONER, PATNA. 5. THE CHANCELLOR OF UNIVERSITIES OF BIHAR THROUGH O.S.D. (JUDICIAL) RAJBHAWAN, PATNA. 6. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE SECRETARY, HIGHER EDUCATION, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA. .... .... RESPONDENT/S ---------- FOR THE PETITIONER:MR. RAJENDRA PD. SINGH, SR. ADVOCATE. MR. SUNIL KUMAR SINGH, ADVOCATE. FOR THE UNIVERSITY:MR. AMARNATH SINGH, ADVOCATE,MR.HANSRAJ, ADVOCATE. FOR THE STATE: MR. MUKUND MOHAN JHA, A.C. TO G.P.18. --------- 7 20-10-2011 Having heard counsel for the parties and taking into account that the basic requirement of grant of promotion on the post of Reader under the merit promotion scheme in the statutes framed by the Chancellor as contained in his memo no. 3975 dated 22.12.1986, had be assessed by the Bihar State University (Constituent College) Service 2 Commission on the parameters of the paragraph no. 4 of the said statute reading as follows:- “The promotion will depend on consideration and assessment of the work done by the teachers, such as publication of research papers, book, reviews and curriculum development, teaching aids, innovation in teaching methods, equipment development etc., presented by the individual teachers which shall be referred to atleast two referees in the subject/discipline concerned.” this court will have no difficulty in holding that the petitioner did not possess the requisite qualification and experience for promotion on the post of reader under the merit promotion statutes. As a matter of fact, in the application filed by the petitioner for his promotion in the merit promotion scheme, the column of work presented for evaluation has been left vacant and that he has also not claimed any publication of his any research paper. The petitioner in such application has also not indicated that he had contributed by way of publications, curriculum development etc., inasmuch as, column no. 15(E) alike 15(A), 15(B) and 15(C) have been left totally vacant, which would only go to show that the petitioner did not possess the requisite qualification for merit promotion on the post of Reader. As a matter of fact, he in his application for merit promotion had only 3 claimed to be the member of the N.A.G.I which by itself cannot be an evidence of his being qualified much less eligible for earning promotion under the merit promotion scheme. Thus apart even from the perusal of records produced by learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the Magadh University, it would become clear that the Bihar State University (Constituent College) Service Commission had got the case of the petitioner evaluated by two expert referees and both of them in their separate recommendation dated 13.09.2006 had found the petitioner ineligible for merit promotion. Once this aspect becomes clear that the petitioner did not possess the requisite qualification as laid down in the merit promotion statutes, there would be no difficulty in dismissing this writ application, especially when the petitioner has already been given his promotion on the post of Reader under the time bound promotion statute as has been clearly asserted in the counter affidavit filed by the University. That being so, this Court does not find any merit in the application and the same is, accordingly, dismissed. RANJAN (Mihir Kumar Jha, J)