Patna High Court - Orders
Ram Chandra Roy 'Madhukar' vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 10 July, 2014
Author: Chakradhari Sharan Singh
Bench: Sharan Singh, Chakradhari Sharan Singh
Patna High Court CWJC No.5595 of 2010 (5) dt.10-07-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.5595 of 2010
======================================================
1. Ram Chandra Roy 'Madhukar' S/O Late Duniya Ram Roy R/O Vill.-
Murtazapur, P.S.- Jandaha, Distt.- Vaishali
.... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State Of Bihar Through The Principal H.R.D. Department,
Government Of Bihar, Patna
2. The Principal Secretary, H.R.D. Department Government Of Bihar,
Patna
3. The Vice Chancellor, L.N.M. University, Darbhanga
4. The Registrar, L.N.M. University, Darbhanga
.... .... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Hemant Kumar Jha
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Mani Madhukar, AC to GA 4
For University : Mrs. Nivedita Nirvikar
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHAKRADHARI
SHARAN SINGH
ORAL ORDER
4 10-07-20141. This writ application has been filed against the decision of the Lalti Narayan Mithila University, Darbhanga by which the petitioner has been directed to superannuate with effect from 31.1.2009 after attaining the age of 62 years.
2. The petitioner, who was the University Professor under the said University claims that he should have been allowed to continue till date he attained the age of 65 years.
3. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondent-State of Bihar, stating therein that the age of retirement of University Teachers has been enhanced to 65 years with effect Patna High Court CWJC No.5595 of 2010 (5) dt.10-07-2014 from 30.6.2010 vide department letter No. 2925 dated 7.12.2011. It has been, accordingly, stated in the counter affidavit that the benefit of enhancement of age could not be given to the petitioner since he attained the age of 62 years with effect from 31.1.2009.
4. In such view of the matter, no order in petitioner's favour can be passed in the present writ application.
5. However, the petitioner shall have the liberty to approach the authority concerned for redressal of his grievance, if so advised, against the said decision of the State Government..
6. This application is disposed of accordingly.
(Chakradhari Sharan Singh, J) ArunKumar/-
U