Patna High Court - Orders
Dr. Anant Kumar Singh vs B.N.Mandal University & Ors on 1 April, 2014
Author: Mihir Kumar Jha
Bench: Mihir Kumar Jha
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1767 of 2013
======================================================
Dr. Suresh Kumar S/O Late Jadu Singh R/O Gandhi Nagar, Darbhanga,
P.S.- Darbhanga, Sadar, District- Darbhanga, Presently Working As
Associate Professor In The Department Of Commerce In Sarv Narayan
Singh Ram Kumar Singh College, Saharsa
.... .... Petitioner
Versus
1. B.N. Mandal University Laloo Nagar, Madhepura, Through Its Vice
Chancellor
2. The Vice Chancellor B.N. Mandal University, Laloo Nagar, Madhepura
3. The Registrar B.N. Mandal University, Laloo Nagar, Madhepura
4. The Finance Officer B.N. Mandal University, Laloo Nagar, Madhepura
5. The Principal Sarv Narayan Singh Ram Kumar Singh College, Saharsa
6. The State Of Bihar
7. The Principal Secretary Department Of Finance, Government Of Bihar,
Patna
8. The Principal Secretary Department Of Education, Government Of
Bihar, New Secretariat, Patna
9. The Secretary Department Of Higher Education, Government Of Bihar,
New Secretariat, Patna
.... .... Respondents
======================================================
with
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1621 of 2013
======================================================
Dr. Ashok S/O Professor Dr. Sri Ram Binod Singh R/O Mohalla Professor
Colony, Alalpatti, P.S.- Benta, District- Darbhanga, Presently Working As
Associate Professor In The Department Of Chemistry In Sarv Narayan
Singh Ram Kumar Singh College, Saharsa
.... .... Petitioner
Versus
1. B.N. Mandal University, Laloo Nagar, Madhepura, Through Its Vice
Chancellor
2. The Vice Chancellor, B.N. Mandal University, Laloo Nagar, Madhepura
3. The Registrar, B.N. Mandal University, Laloo Nagar, Madhepura
4. The Finance Officer, B.N. Mandal University, Laloo Nagar, Madhepura
5. The Principal, Sarv Narayan Singh Ram Kumar Singh College, Saharsa
6. The State Of Bihar
7. The Principal Secretary, Department Of Finance, Government Of Bihar,
Patna
8. The Principal Secretary, Department Of Education, Government Of
Bihar, New Secretariat, Patna
9. The Secretary, Department Of Higher Education, Government Of Bihar,
New Secretariat, Patna
.... .... Respondents
======================================================
with
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1845 of 2013
======================================================
Dr. Anant Kumar Singh S/O Late Mahavir Singh R/O Mohalla Chanakya
Patna High Court CWJC No.1767 of 2013 (5) dt.01-04-2014 2
Puri, Paswan Chowk, P.S.- Hajipur Sadar, District- Vaishali (Hajipur),
Presently Working As Associate Professor In The Department Of Chemistry
In Sarv Narayan Singh Ram Kumar Singh College, Saharsa
.... .... Petitioner
Versus
1. B.N. Mandal University, Laloo Nagar, Madhepura, Through Its Vice
Chancellor
2. The Vice Chancellor, B.N. Mandal University, Laloo Nagar, Madhepura
3. The Registrar, B.N. Mandal University, Laloo Nagar, Madhepura
4. The Finance Officer, B.N. Mandal University, Laloo Nagar, Madhepura
5. The Principal, Sarv Narayan Singh Ram Kumar Singh College, Saharsa
6. The State Of Bihar
7. The Principal Secretary, Department Of Finance, Government Of Bihar,
Patna
8. The Principal Secretary, Department Of Education, Government Of
Bihar, New Secretariat, Patna
9. The Secretary, Department Of Higher Education, Government Of Bihar,
New Secretariat, Patna
.... .... Respondents
======================================================
with
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1574 of 2013
======================================================
Dr. Ashok Kumar Singh S/O Late Ramjeet Singh R/O Shanti Kunj,
Gangjala, P.S.- Saharsa Town District- Saharsa Presently Working As
Associate Professor (Reader) In The Department Of Ancient Indian History
And Culture, Sarv Narayan Singh Ram Kumar Singh College, Saharsa
.... .... Petitioner
Versus
1. B.N. Mandal University, Laloo Nagar, Madhepura, Through Its Vice
Chancellor
2. The Vice Chancellor, B.N. Mandal University, Laloo Nagar, Madhepura
3. The Registrar, B.N. Mandal University, Laloo Nagar, Madhepura
4. The Finance Officer, B.N. Mandal University, Laloo Nagar, Madhepura
5. The Principal, Sarv Narayan Singh Ram Kumar Singh College, Saharsa
6. The State Of Bihar
7. The Principal Secretary, Department Of Finance, Government Of Bihar,
Patna
8. The Principal Secretary, Department Of Education, Government Of
Bihar, New Secretariat, Patna
9. The Secretary, Department Of Higher Education, Government Of Bihar,
New Secretariat, Patna
.... .... Respondents
======================================================
Appearance :
(In CWJC No.1767 of 2013)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Jagnnath Singh, Adv.
For the State : Mr. Bhaskar Shankar, AC to GP16
For respondent no.5 : Mr. Bipin Bihari Sinha, Adv.
Mr. S.K.Ranjan, Adv.
(In CWJC No.1621 of 2013)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Jagnnath Singh, Adv.
Patna High Court CWJC No.1767 of 2013 (5) dt.01-04-2014 3
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Rajendra Kr. Jha Gp18
(In CWJC No.1845 of 2013)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Jagnnath Singh, Adv.
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Rajeev Kr. Singh Gp15
(In CWJC No.1574 of 2013)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Jagnnath Singh, Adv.
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Namrta Mishra Gp17
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MIHIR KUMAR JHA
ORAL ORDER
5 01-04-2014Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. All these writ applications have been filed for a direction to the respondent authorities to make payment of difference of salary of the post of Reader (Associate Professor).
3. In the light of the aforementioned prayer and the perusal of the materials on record filed by the petitioners, this Court has expected the respondents to explain the reason for non payment of salary to the petitioners as per their entitlement. Let it be noted that the payment of salary is being made to the petitioners from the fund being released by the State Government and the State Government had filed its counter affidavit duly sworn by Mr. Sunil Kumar Sinha, Under Secretary in the Department of Education, wherein, the facts stated by the petitioner in respect of availability of sanctioned post and/or their being eligible to hold the post on which they were working was not questioned in any manner. The State Government in its counter affidavit has also taken a plea that it has been releasing Patna High Court CWJC No.1767 of 2013 (5) dt.01-04-2014 4 funds in view of the budgetary provisions made for the College. A caveat, however, was that the College of the petitioner was taken over College in the fourth phase about which the matter was to be inquired in terms of the order of the Apex Court dated 22.01.2013 passed in S.L.P. No. 27964-27965 of 2010.
4. As noted above, there was no objection of any kind whatsoever on the part of the officials of the State Government in payment of salary of the petitioners on the post they were working and in fact it became clear that the requisite fund for payment of salary of the petitioners as per the budgetary provisions were already released by the State Government in favour of the University.
5. This Court had then addressed to the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the University. In such counter affidavit sworn by the Liason Officer of the University apart from other things it was stated as follows:-
"That for the payment of salary from the month of September, 2013, the earmarked fund as provided by the State Government vide letter No. 1712 dated 18.09.13 Annexure no. 13 series with supplementary affidavit filed in C.W.J.C No. 1754 of 2013 was released to the colleges concerned alongwith pay slip for each and every employee mentioning there in clearly the total amount to be paid to each of such employees within the limit of college wise fund allocated and due to less grants, the amount remained due to be paid /less paid as well. The pay slips issued in favour of the petitioner and sent to the petitioner was to be paid Patna High Court CWJC No.1767 of 2013 (5) dt.01-04-2014 5 with the benefit of scale of pay as prescribed as per their promotions as Associate Professors/Readers, showing their total admissible amount and the amount to be paid, which was though less them admissibility, due to less allocation of fund by the State Government. Thus as regards the prayers of the petitioner for payment as per his promotions, the answering University accepted the same and acted upon accordingly within the limit of earmarked allocation of fund by the State Government.
That the payment as per the pay slip and within the limit of fund allocated by the Government was/is to be continued. But the petitioner and such others were not paid their salaries accordingly for the months from October 2013 to January, 2014 released vide letter No. A/c-762/14 dated 13.02.2014-Annexure No. 14 with the supplementary affidavit filed by the petitioner in C.W.J.C No. 1574 of 2013 and subsequent letters for which the Principal, S.N.S.R.K.S., College, Saharsa has been asked to show-cause vide University letter No. A/c- 769/14 dated 06.03.2014 for necessary action."
6. It thus became clear to this Court that the grievance of the petitioner actually for non payment of their dues of salary as per the entitlement was on account of the action taken by the Principal of the College. This Court, accordingly, had directed the Principal of the College to appear in person and explain his conduct in not paying even the amount which was sanctioned and released by the State Government and sent to him by the University for its payment to the petitioners. The Principal of the College had thereafter filed his counter affidavit, wherein, he has sought to justify his action of making lesser payment than what was released by the State Government and was sent by the Patna High Court CWJC No.1767 of 2013 (5) dt.01-04-2014 6 University to the College for its payment to the petitioners. Surprisingly, the Principal of the College had sought to throw the blame either on the State Government or the University and had played upon the words of the communication of the State Government dated 16.10.2012 by taking a plea that from its reading, it would be clear that since the discrepancy was not removed by the University, the amount sanctioned by the University could not be treated to be approved. He had also taken a plea of the availability of the sanctioned post and had further referred to the communication of the Director, Higher Education dated 24.04.2013 as with regard to payment of salary moreover the emoluments as well as pension in the manner prescribed. According to him, since in the annexures appended in the letter dated 24.04.2013 difference of payment of the financial year 2010-2011 was for the University had been shown to be nil. It was presumed that the funds were not allotted to the difference of pay to the concerned employees. He had also relied on a communication of the Joint Secretary of the Education Department U.C. 38 dated 08.08.2013 with specific reference to paragraph no. 4(xi) to contend that the calculation again had been made differently for the financial year-2012-13, inasmuch as, it was also indicated in the aforementioned letter dated 08.08.2013 Patna High Court CWJC No.1767 of 2013 (5) dt.01-04-2014 7 that the sanctioned strength and payments were to be calculated keeping in mind the aforementioned period and nothing else. He had also finally placed reliance on another letter no. 127 dated 01.03.2014 of the Joint Secretary of the Education Department that lesser amount of grant was being provided for the payment of salary for the financial year 2013-14 which has also indicated that the teaching and non-teaching employees were to be paid their salary in three installments.
7. Based on these superstructure, the Principal of the College having referred to different communication of the Education Department that he had made a series of correspondence from various letters dated 04.12.2012, 05.10.2012, 09.10.2013, 04.10.2013, 22.11.2013 and 21.02.2014, seeking guidelines with respect to payment of entitlement including the differences of pay and differences of promotional benefits to the teaching and non-teaching employees of the College but the University had not responded to any of such letter of the Principal of the College. It may be also noted here that the Principal has submitted a chart with regard to total grant released by the Government and University to the College and on the basis of such chart, he had classified the teachers promoted in phase one and phase two for justifying that never their promotional post as Patna High Court CWJC No.1767 of 2013 (5) dt.01-04-2014 8 also payment of their full salary of the promotional post was paid. According to him others belonging to third, fourth and fifth phase of promotion were actually not entitled for promotional benefit in absence of funds which could be paid to them only after allocation of fund by the State Government. In this respect, paragraph no. 14 to 18 of the counter affidavit filed by the Principal becomes relevant and is quoted hereinbelow:-
"That it is stated that the demand had been made from the University related to the payment to the said amounts to the petitioner as well as remaining others and just after the allocation to the amounts from the university to the college without any delay the same shall be pay to the him and remaining others.
That it is stated that the Principal of college in question had referred a demand for salary difference from March 2013 to January 2014 and it is expected that the same shall be released by the University to the college and the college will be in a position to ensure the payment of the difference amounts.
That it is stated that for the better appreciation and just decision that the respondent no. 5 submitted the utilization certificates to the University against the funds allocated/allotted. It is important to mention at this stage that the detailed chart had been furnished to the University as the utilization certificate against the funds allotted as well as the demand for difference of pay. In the said background it is an appropriate to submit that the difference of pay shall be released and paid to the petitioner and others just after the allotments of funds and disbursement in the account of the college for the said purpose.
That it is stated that the facts and figure as supplied it appears that the proportionate payment had been given against the due salary and other emolument to the teaching and non teaching employees of the college in question. It is submitted that for the shorts for dues or the amounts as a difference of pay the demands had been Patna High Court CWJC No.1767 of 2013 (5) dt.01-04-2014 9 made from the university, it is hoped and trusted that the same will be released immediately and consequently the payment shall be made to the employees which includes this petitioners also.
That it is stated that the special secretary cum director higher education had issued the memo no. 416 Patna dated 26/02/2014 related to the release of the amounts to financial year 2013-2014. It is further submitted that the university had issued the letter no. 172/2014 dated 14/03/2014. The letter indicates the special direction/directions for its compliance. It was indicated that from March 2013 to April 2014 the amounts which was shorts for the same should be reported within three days. In the said background the steps had been taken to furnishing the individual details as sort for to all including the petitioner."
8. From the reading of the counter affidavit of the Principal of the College, it thus becomes clear to this Court that he was trying to avoid the question namely, non payment of the actual amount which was released by the State Government for payment of salary to the petitioners and also the amount being also given by the University to the College in the individual names of the petitioners. Let it be noted that there is no dispute about the promotion of the petitioners, inasmuch as, the Principal of the College himself while replying paragraph nos. 16 and 17 of the writ application in paragraph no. 24 of the counter affidavit had stated as follows:-
"That the statement made in para 16 and 17 to the writ petitioner had been wrongly interpreted the facts and figure as supplied it is an apparent that there is not dispute for the promotion and the promotional avenue in Patna High Court CWJC No.1767 of 2013 (5) dt.01-04-2014 10 the case in hand however the specific and clear stands had been taken by the college related to the sort for of the amounts for the payments and the proportional payment had been given to all the teaching and non teaching employees to the college including him eth remaining accounts of the difference of pay shall be released or pay to him just after receiving the funds for the said very purpose."
9. In such situation, this Court was totally dissatisfied with the stand taken by the Principal of the College and had passed a reasoned order on 27.03.2014, relevant portion whereof reads as follows:-
"Having heard learned counsel for the parties at length, this Court is thoroughly dissatisfied with the explanation of the Principal of the college. This Court does not expect the Principal to behave in such an arbitrary manner. If the University had made certain allocation for payment of salary to the teaching staff of Sarv Narayan Singh Ram Kumar Singh College, Saharsa in the B.N. Mandal University, such payments were to be made strictly as per the allocation made by the University. If any person including the Principal himself was aggrieved on account of such allocation of fund, the concerned person had to revert to the University for seeking modification in the allocation. Till it was done, the Principal by himself had no authority either to draw higher amount for himself or to lower down the amount of the petitioners.
When such an observation was made, Mr. Bipin Bihari Singh, learned counsel for the Principal, submits that whatever amount has been sent by the University in the name of the petitioners shall be disbursed by tomorrow and an affidavit will be filed by the Principal on Monday.
Put up this case on Tuesday (1.4.2014) under the heading "For Admission-I" at the top of the list."Patna High Court CWJC No.1767 of 2013 (5) dt.01-04-2014 11
10. Pursuant to the aforesaid order of this Court dated 27.3.2014 the Principal of S.N.S.R.K.S.College, Saharsa has filed his supplementary counter affidavit, wherein it has been stated that he is apologetic about his earlier action and conduct and would tender unqualified apology to this Court. In this regard it has been stated that the difference of salary of the four writ petitioners to the tune of Rs.5,08,372/- has been paid to them vide cheque No. 338124 dated 28.3.2014 which has now to be paid to them through the Bank.
11. Though some explanation has been given by the Principal of the College for the earlier short payment but then having regard to the materials on record this Court must hold that the Principal is not the Lord of all he surveys and therefore, he has to strictly abide by the order and instructions of the University in the use of allocated fund specially when the same is in the name of each of the teaching and non-teaching employee of his College. In no event the Principal of the College could have made short payment to any employee or could have drawn excess payment for himself or for his Bursar. As a matter of fact this Court was also inclined to direct the University to initiate a proceeding against the Principal but then his repentance as expressed in the supplementary counter affidavit followed by the submission of Patna High Court CWJC No.1767 of 2013 (5) dt.01-04-2014 12 Mr. Bipin Bihari Sinha learned counsel has for the time being made this Court to believe that the Principal of the College has not only truly realized his mistake but is also committed not repeat the same in future.
12. It is, however, made clear that henceforth the University will send not only to the Principal of this College but to all the Principals of the University the clear instruction with the fund for payment of exact amount of monthly salary in the individual name of each and every teaching and non-teaching employees and the Principal thereafter either will pay that amount or if he has got any reservation in making payment of such amount he will revert back to the University seeking clarification for making such payment. The Principal in no event will be entitled to reduce or enhance the amount already allocated by the University to the College for its payment to the individual teaching/ non- teaching employees.
13. As a matter of fact since all the money for payment of salary is being paid by the State Government there should be also a concerted effort on the part of the officials of the State Government and the University to also evolve a system under which whatever amount has to be paid to the teaching and non- teaching employee of the University should be directly paid in the Patna High Court CWJC No.1767 of 2013 (5) dt.01-04-2014 13 account of the concerned teacher/non-teaching staff. This Court is aware that doing so will be an enormous task and it may not be possible for the State Government and University to immediately implement the direct payment of amount of salary in the bank account of the individual teaching and non teaching employee of the University and Colleges but then a policy should be evolved so that in future a situation like present one where despite release of fund and also its release by the State Government and University in favour of the Principal of the College short payment of amount was made to the petitioners and the Principal himself and his Bursar had drawn excess amount beyond what was shown in the schedule of payment issued by the University.
14. This Court would not like to say any more and as the grievance of the petitioners stands redressed all the writ applications now are disposed of.
15. The personal appearance of Dr. Prakash Chandra Khan, the Principal of the College, is hereby dispensed with.
16. Let a copy of this order be also sent to the Principal Secretary of Education Department and Registrar of the B.N. Mandal University for its compliance by all concerned.
(Mihir Kumar Jha, J) surendra/ranjan