High Court Patna High Court - Orders

Sheo Shankar Choudhary vs The T.M.Bhagalpur University … on 17 January, 2011

Patna High Court – Orders
Sheo Shankar Choudhary vs The T.M.Bhagalpur University … on 17 January, 2011
                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                                       CWJC No.15774 of 2004
                    SHEO SHANKAR CHOUDHARY son of
                    Late Ganga Choudhary, residnet of 101,
                    Nawab Colony, Police Line Road,
                    Bhagalpur-812001.
                                      ........               .....Petitioner
                                       Versus
                   1.The T.M.Bhagalpur University, Bhagalpur,
                      through its registrar
                    2.The Vice Chancellor, T.M.Bhagalpur University,
                       Bhagalpur
                    3.The Registrar, T.M.Bhagalpur University,
                       Bhagalpur
                    4.The Finance Officer, T.M.Bhagalpur University,
                       Bhagalpur
                    5.The Principal, T.N.B.College, Bhagalpur
                    6.The State of Bihar through the Commissioner-
                      Cum-Secretary, Department of Finance, Govt. of
                      Bihar, Old Secretariat, Patna
                    7.The Commissioner-cum-Secretary, Deptt. of
                      Higher Education, Govt. of Bihar, Patna
                    8.The Director, Deptt. of Higher Education,
                     Govt. of Bihar, Patna
                                       .......              ......Respondents
                                            -----------

14. 17.1.2011. Heard Mr.Purushottam Kumar Jha, learned counsel

for the petitioner, Mr.Ashok Kumar Keshari, learned counsel for

T.M.Bhagalpur University, Bhagalpur as well as learned A.C. to

S.C.-X.

Mr.Ashok Kumar Keshari, learned counsel for

T.M.Bhagalpur, University, Bhagalpur, while referring to annexure-

D to 3rd counter affidavit, submits that by order contained in Memo

No.B/24665-68 dated 14.2.2009 all the grievances of the petitioner

have been redresses and nothing is pending.

Mr.Jha, learned counsel for the petitioner disputes

the calculation. The court is of the opinion that for the purpose of

resolving such dispute, the petitioner can well be advised to
2

approach the competent authority by filing a representation. If such

representation is filed, it is expected that the same will be considered

in accordance with law without any delay.

The writ petition, thus, stands disposed of.

Md.S.                              ( Rakesh Kumar, J.)