PATNA HIGH COURT ISSUES JUDGEMENT ON MUKESH KUMAR SINHA V/S THE STATE OF BIHAR AND OTHER

PATNA, India, July 18 -- Patna High Court issued the following judgment on July 10:

Heard the parties.

2. The petitioner has approached this Court seeking a direction upon the respondents to ensure payment of all the post retiral benefits, who has superannuated from the post of Assistant Professor in the Department of History from Mahila College, Khagaria; a constituent college of Munger University on 28.02.2021.

3. The grievance of the petitioner is in limited bound. Pursuant to a local advertisement, the petitioner, who was having qualification of Master in History applied and finally selected for the post of Lecturer in the Department of History in Mahila College, Khagaria on 20.02.1981. At the relevant time, the College, in question, was an affiliated College of Bhagalpur University and later on it was converted into constituent College of Bhagalpur University, which was renamed as Tilka Manjhi Bhagalpur University.

4. On account of controversies raised with respect to the services of the employees of the Colleges of different constituent Colleges of IV phase, various writ applications were filed in the Court, including (Bihar Rajya M.S.E.S.K.K.M. & Ors.) C.W.J.C. No.4021 of 1997. The matter travelled up to the Apex Court in S.L.P. No.6098 of 1997, which was disposed off vide order dated 12.10.2004. In pursuant thereto, a One Man Committee was constituted under the Chairmanship of Hon'ble Justice (Retd.) S.C. Agrawal. The record of all the employees, including the petitioner was placed before the Commission and the Commission headed by Hon'ble Justice (Retd.) S.C. Agrawal, submitted his report in favour of the petitioner. In pursuant to the said report, finally the University issued regularization letter in favour of the petitioner as directed by the Apex Court, the copy of which is placed on record as Annexure4.

5. Notwithstanding the facts noted hereinabove, once again unsuccessful candidates approached this Court and the matter again travelled upto the Apex Court in SLP (C) No.12591 of 2010 and by order dated 22.01.2013, in order to settle the dispute in relation to 4th phase Colleges, One Man Commission was constituted under the Chairmanship of Hon'ble Justice (Retd.) S.B. Sinha. The matter in relation to the appointment of the petitioner, once again examined by the subsequent Commission headed by Hon'ble Justice (Retd.) S.B. Sinha and all the objections raised against the petitioner stood rejected and regularization of the petitioner was affirmed. Taking note of the abovementioned position, the petitioner was finally accorded the promotion to the post of Assistant Professor and subsequent thereto he reached his age of superannuation on 28.02.2021 after attaining 65 years.

6. Upon being superannuated, the petitioner submitted all the necessary required documents for extending all the retiral benefits and other admissible dues, in the meanwhile, the respondent-Munger University has come out with letter no.16/2022 dated 03.03.2022 and again a clarification has been sought for with regard to the improvement examination of M.A. A query has been made with regard to the date of eligibility for consideration of absorption of the petitioner on the initial post. In response to the aforesaid letter, a detailed representation has been filed on behalf of the petitioner, the copy of which is marked as Annexure-11.

7. Referring to the aforesaid facts, Mr. Akshansh Shanker, learned Advocate for the petitioner, thus contended that once the initial appointment of the petitioner and his regularization on the post of Lecturer has been duly verified and approved by both the Commissions, including the Commission headed by Hon'ble Justice (Retd.) S.C. Agrawal and further Hon'ble Justice (Retd.) S.B. Sinha, any objection raised by the University is not only unwanted rather amount to overreaching the decision taken by the Commission and/or in anyway not justified. The petitioner has now already superannuated on 28.02.2021 and even after lapse of about four years, he has not been accorded his rightful benefits, compelling him to approach this Court.

8. Placing reliance upon a decision rendered by the High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi in the case of Phul Chandra Thakur v. The State of Jharkhand & Ors. [W.P.(S) No.5240 of 2021], the learned Advocate for the petitioner further buttress his submission by contending that once the petitioner has already superannuated and there had never been any objection with regard to the appointment and regularization, and even if there was any objection, the same had already been stood rejected by the Commissions twice, as afore-noted; hence, it is not open for the respondents to raise the issue of appointment afresh after retirement of the petitioner.

The rest of the document can be viewed at https://patnahighcourt.gov.in/viewjudgment/MTUjODcyOSMyMDIyIzEjTg==-LXY4BWVUv--am1--k=

Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.