IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.10671 of 2008
Surendra Narain Chaudhary, Son of Late Ram Nandan Chaudhary Retired.
Reader of Gopeshwar College Hathwa, Gopalganj at present Kutub Bihar
Phase-I, Thankar Chowk, Plot No. - 8, Block - F, New Delhi - 71.
..... ......... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State Of Bihar through the Secretary, Human Resources
Development Department, Bihar, Patna.
2. The Secretary, Human Resources Development Department,
Government of Bihar, Vikash Bhawan, Patna.
3. Jai Prakash University, Chapra, through its Registrar, District
Chapra.
4. The Vice-Chancellor, Jai Prakash University, Chapra, District -
Saran at Chapra.
5. The Finance Officer, Jai Prakash University, Chapra, District -
Saran.
6. Baba Saheb Bheem Rao Ambedkar Bihar University, Muzaffarpur
through its Registrar, District - Muzaffarpur.
7. The Vice-Chancellor, Baba Saheb Bheem Rao Ambedkar Bihar
University, District - Muzaffarpur.
8. The Registrar, Bheem Rao Ambedkar Bihar University, Muzaffapur,
District - Muzaffarpur.
9. The Finance Officer, Baba Saheb Bheem Rao Ambedkar, Bihar
University, Muzaffarpur, District - Muzaffarpur.
10. The Finance Officer, Jai Prakash University, Chapra.
................. Respondents
----------------------------------
10 03.11.2011 Heard Sri Shubh Narain Singh, learned counsel
for the petitioner, Smt. Nutan Sahay, learned A.C. to
Standing Counsel No. 1 appearing on behalf of respondent
no. 1 & 2/State, Sri Shivendra Kishore, learned counsel
appearing on behalf of respondent no. 3 to 5 & 10 / J.P.
University, Chapra and Sri Harendra Kumar Tiwari, learned
counsel appearing on behalf of respondent no. 6 to 9/ Baba
Saheb Bheem Rao Ambedkar Bihar University,
Muzaffarpur.
The petitioner, who retired in the year 1995 as
‘Reader’ has prayed for directing the respondents to pay
2
remaining amount of retiral dues. At the very outset Sri
Shivendra Kishore has raised preliminary objection on the
point of maintainability of the writ petition. It was
submitted by Sri Kishore that the petitioner has earlier
approached this court by filing a writ petition for retiral
dues which was disposed of by a common order on
21.12.2000 vide ‘Annexure – 1’ to the writ petition, and
thereafter, since that order was not fully complied with, the
petitioner had filed a contempt petition vide MJC No. 1170
of 2001, which too was disposed of on 03.05.2002. It was
submitted that for the same relief the petitioner is not
entitled to file second writ petition.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn my
attention to last paragraph of the order dated 03.05.2002 in
MJC No. 1170 of 2001 and it has been argued that while
disposing of the contempt petition this court had granted
liberty to the petitioner for pursuing his further claim, if
any, before the appropriate authority, and as such, the
petitioner for remaining grievances has approached the
authority concerned.
Sri Shivendra Kishore has further argued that he
has specifically stated in its counter affidavit that difference
of arrear of pension has also been paid and nothing is
pending with the J.P. University, Chapra.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
3
the writ petition may be disposed of granting liberty to the
petitioner to approach the authority concerned by filing
representation. It has not been disputed by learned counsel
for the petitioner that payment has been made by J.P.
University, Chapra, but a claim has been made that
calculation chart has not been supplied by the J.P.
University, Chapra.
Sri Harendra Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for
respondent / B.R.A. Bihar University, Muzaffarpur, does
not dispute the prayer made by learned counsel for the
petitioner for approaching the authority concerned by filing
representation.
In view of the facts and circumstances, the writ
petition stands disposed of granting liberty to the petitioner
to file a fresh representation regarding his remaining
grievance along with relevant documents before respondent
no. 8 / Registrar, Bheem Rao Ambedkar Bihar University,
Muzaffarpur, within a period of eight weeks from today. If
such representation is filed, the respondent no. 8 is required
to examine the same and pass appropriate order in
accordance with law within a period of four months from
the date of filing of such representation. Even in case of
refusal, the respondent no. 8 is required to pass a speaking
order and communicate the same to the petitioner within
four months from the date of filing of such representation.
4
The petitioner is further granted liberty to approach the
respondent no. 3 / J.P. University, Chapra, through its
Registrar by filing a representation regarding the claim for
providing calculation chart. The said representation must be
filed within a period of six weeks from today. If such
representation is filed, the respondent no. 3 is required to
examine the same and pass appropriate order in accordance
with law, and if possible, provide calculation chart to the
petitioner within aforesaid time i.e. four months from the
date of filing of representation.
The writ petition stands disposed of.
( Rakesh Kumar, J.)
Praful