Patna High Court - Orders
Indranath Jha vs The State Of Bihar on 10 April, 2023
Author: Satyavrat Verma
Bench: Satyavrat Verma
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.1467 of 2021
In
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.4722 of 2020
======================================================
Indranath Jha
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shashi Bhushan Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mrs. Binita Singh, SC-28
For the University : Md. Nadim Seraj, Advocate
Mr. Shailesh Kumar, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 10-04-2023Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned counsel for the State and Md. Nadim Seraj, the learned counsel for the University assisted by Shri Shailesh Kumar, learned Advocate.
The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the contempt application has been filed alleging violation of the order dated 13.04.2021 in CWJC No. 4722 of 2020.
The learned counsel further submits that the pay fixation done of the petitioner by the Statutory Committee of the University was objected by the Pay Verification Cell of the State. It is next submitted that on account of objection raised by the Pay Verification Cell of the State to the statutory fixation done by the Statutory Commission of the University, the Patna High Court MJC No.1467 of 2021(3) dt.10-04-2023 2/4 University started recovering the amount so paid to the petitioner which necessitated the filing of CWJC No. 4722 of 2020. Learned counsel next submits that from bare perusal of the order dated 13.04.2021 in CWJC No. 4722 of 2020, it would manifest that the Hon'ble Single Judge while dealing with the issue had clearly recorded that the respondents are directed to adhere to the determination of the pay fixation made by the Statutory Committee of the University, as contained in Annexure-2, the University is obliged to grant all the benefits available to the petitioner in terms of the judgment of the Apex Court in Sunny Prakash case reported in (2013) 3 SCC 559 and ensure payment of entire dues on the basis of pay fixation as contained in Annexure-2.
The learned counsel further submits that the said direction by the Hon'ble Single Judge was based on the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the Pay Verification Cell of the State does not have any role to play where the Statutory Committee of the University has fixed the statutory dues of the teaching/non-teaching employees of the University. It is next submitted that the Hon'ble Single Judge also directed that in the event, if the aforesaid payment, as fixed by the Statutory Committee of the University, is not paid to the Patna High Court MJC No.1467 of 2021(3) dt.10-04-2023 3/4 petitioner within a period of three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of the order, the petitioner shall be entitled to interest at the rate of 12 percent per annum. It is next submitted that despite such clear finding of the Hon'ble Single judge, the petitioner till date is running from pillar to post and the fruits of the order passed by the learned writ court remains elusive.
The learned counsel for the State submits that the State has preferred LPA No. 86 of 2022 against the order dated 13.04.2021 in CWJC No. 4722 of 2022 and the same is pending adjudication.
The learned counsel for the University submits that even the University has filed LPA No. 410 of 2021 but the same for non-appearance was dismissed for default by order dated 16.05.2022. The learned counsel for the University submits that accordingly a restoration application has been filed seeking restoration of the aforesaid LPA but the same is also pending consideration.
Learned counsel for the petitioner rebuts the submission of the learned counsel for the State and submits that it absolutely does not stand to reason that when the order of the writ court was passed on 13.04.2021 why it took so long for the Patna High Court MJC No.1467 of 2021(3) dt.10-04-2023 4/4 State to file LPA. It is next submitted that even the University mechanically based on the objections raised by the Pay Verification Cell of the State Government came to a conclusion that the pay fixation of the petitioner done by the Statutory Committee was not in consonance with law. The learned counsel next submits that if the objection raised by the State Government was correct then the University should also have filed the LPA on the ground that the Statutory Committee while fixing the pay of the petitioner committed blunder but the LPA of the University does not even remotely suggest that a plea has been taken that the Statutory Committee had wrongly fixed the pay of the petitioner.
Be that as it may, put up this case on 08.05.2023. The Court expects that in the meantime, the authorities of the State and the University will consider complying the order of the writ court by taking an undertaking from the petitioner that in the event, the State or the University succeed in LPA, the amount so received by the petitioner shall be recovered from his pensionary benefits.
(Satyavrat Verma, J) Rishi-II/-
U