SHREEDHAR NARAYAN PANDEY Vs. L N MITHILA UNIVERSITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this writ petition, the petitioner has sought for mandamus or any other appropriate writ commanding the respondents L.N. Mithila University and its officials to pay all the retiral benefits including the gratuity, G.P.F. and leave encashment etc. and start paying pension on prorate basis for the period of service rendered by the petitioner as Lecturer and Reader.

(2.) In short the case of the petitioner is that he was appointed as Lecturer (History) in G.D. College, Begusarai by the then governing body on 26th August, 1961 when the said College was an affiliated unit of erstwhile Bhagalpur University and in the year 1972 it became a constituent unit of the said University, Later on creation of L.N. Mithila University the College was brought under the said University. Meanwhile, as claimed by him, he went on one year leave on 1.8.1978 with lien to join Jawaharlal Nehru University (Post Graduate Centre), Imphal, where he was permanently absorbed/confirmed on 31.3.1979 and ultimately retired from there on 31.1.1996. According to the petitioner, despite several efforts made and even direction given by this Court in the writ petition filed by him neither the Principal of G.D. College, Bhagalpur nor the Registrar of L.N. Mithila University sent the amount deducted under G.P.R, Leave, Insurance etc. to Manipur University and therefore, his 17 years of service in L.N. Mithila University could not be linked with the services rendered under Manipur University and thus, it is contended that the respondent Mithila University is legally bound to grant pension and other retiral benefits to him for 17 years of service which is more than the qualifying period of service. According to the petitioner, Manipur University fixed his pension on the basis of service rendered under them but the service rendered under L.N. Mithila University nothing has been paid. It is claimed that while in service under L.N. Mithila University the petitioner opted for pension scheme and there had been deduction from the salary of the petitioner under that head.

(3.) It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that under Clause 16 of the Statutes for the grant of retirement benefits to employees of the Bihar/Ranchi/Bhagalpur/Magadh/L.N. Mithila/ K.S.D. Sanskrit Universities an employee eligible for pension if he ceased to be in University service between 1.4.1972 and 31.12.1972 according to the scales given in schedule 'A' (i) and if he ceased to be in University service between 1.1.1973 to 30.3.1979 then as per schedule A (ii) and those ceased to be in University service from 31.3.1979 onwards are eligible for pension in the scales given in schedule A(iii) and any further change in the rate of pension as also relied in pension under the Bihar (Government), Pension Rules are equally applicable to the University employees. Learned counsel contended that since the petitioner undisputedly ceased to be in the University service after termination of lien by permanent absorption in Manipur University on 31.31979 he is entitled for pension in the scale given in schedule A(iii). Learned counsel has placed reliance on the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Vasant Gangaramsa Chandan v. State of Maharashtra and Ors., reported in (1996) 10 SCC 148. In my opinion, the decision in the case of Vasant Gangaramsa Chandan (supra) relied upon by the learned counsel for the petitioner has got no application to the facts of the present has got no application to the facts of the present case. There is no provision in the Statute like the provisions of the Scheme relied upon by the Apex Court in the said case.