IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
LPA No.1495 of 2001
DR.KISHORE KUMAR & ANR
Versus
THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS
With
LPA No.22 of 2002
DR.SURENDRA PRASAD SINHA
Versus
THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS
With
LPA No.212 of 2002
DR.OM PRAKASH NARAYAN
Versus
THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS
With
LPA No.1497 of 2001
DR.(PROF.)JAINENDRA KUMAR
Versus
THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS
With
LPA No.1499 of 2001
DHARMENDRA NARAYAN SINGH & ANR
Versus
THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS
With
LPA No.1515 of 2001
B.R.A.BIHAR UNIVERSITY TEACHER & Anr.
Versus
THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS
-----------
46. 14/7/2008 All these appeals arise out of the common judgment dated
16.10.2001 passed by learned Single Judge in CWJC No. 9839 of 2001
and its analogous cases.
We have heard Mr. Ganesh Prasad Singh, Sr. Advocate and
Mr. Chitranjan Sinha Sr. Advocate on behalf of the appellants. B.R.
Ambedkar University is represented by Mr. Ajay Bihari Sinha. Standing
Counsel No. 20 Mr. Anjani Kumar, appears on behalf of the State.
The controversy in the writ application was as to whether the
lecturers whose services were absorbed in the University or the College
-2-
concerned under the three statues for regularization of services of
purely temporary lecturers are entitled to take into account the period of
their services rendered before absorptions. The learned Single Judge
on consideration of the material on record held as follows:-
“I would, therefore, hold and direct
that in case a teacher was holding the post of
lecturer validly and legally on the date of his
absorption, he would be entitled to the benefit
of the entire previous service. On the other
hand, if a lecturer was not holding the post of
lecturer lawfully and validly on the date of his
absorption, he would be entitled to the benefit
of previous service only to the extent his
previous service was in accordance with law.
The State Government and the University will
accordingly reconsider and review the cases
of the petitioners and extend to them, in so far
as permissible, the benefit of the previous
service to the extent it was held lawfully and
validly.”
No exception can be taken to the principle enunciated above.
However, we hasten to add that in case an individual lecturer
is not given the benefit of previous service on the ground that he was
not holding the post of lecturer lawfully, he shall be at liberty to assail
the same in accordance with law.
We do not find any merit in these appeals and it is dismissed
in limine with the observation aforesaid.
(Chandramauli Kr. Prasad, J.)
S.Ali (Dr. Ravi Ranjan, J.)