UMESH CHANDRA DAS Vs. CHANCELLOR, UNIVERSITIES OF BIHAR; MUZAFFARPUR; VICE-CHANCELLOR; REGISTRAR; B R A BIHAR UNIVERSITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In view of identical issues being involved the writ applications have been considered together and are being disposed of by a common order.

(2.) The C.W.J.C. No. 11565 of 2001 was filed for direction to the respondent B.R.Ambedkar Bihar University and its authorities to immediately take follow up action on the recommendation made by the Bihar State Universities (Constituent Colleges) Service Commission (hereinafter referred to as "the Commission") by issuing notification of promotion of the petitioner nos. 2 to 5 from the post of Reader to the post of University Professor fixing their pay in the scale admissible to the University Professor with effect from the respective dates of their promotion and also to grant all the consequential benefits. However, petitioner No. 1 sought relief to immediately fix his pay in the scale of University Professor with effect from 12.12.1989 as per notification of promotion issued by the University vide memo no. B/78 dated 17.1.2000 and memo no. B/1347 dated 12.6.2000 and also for grant all consequential benefits. A declaration was also holding that the staying the process of shifting back the dates of promotion of the Professor under 16 years time bound promotion scheme and follow up action by the Chancellor vide his letter dated 30.8.2000 addressed to all the Vice Chancellor would not be applicable in the case of the petitioners. However, for the reasons mentioned in the order dated 28.11.2013 this application was dismissed as not pressed with respect to the petitioner no. 1.

(3.) Later on I.A. No. 4175 of 2007 was filed in this writ application for amendment in the relief portion. It stood stated in the aforesaid interlocutory application that during the pendency of this case the University notified the promotion of the petitioner nos. 2 to 5 in the rank of University Professor vide Annexures 15 and 15/1 dated 14.11.2006 and 15.11.2006 respectively. However, the aforesaid notifications were again recalled vide memo no. B/844 dated 5.5.2007 as contained in Annexure 16. As a consequence the petitioners sought liberty to challenge Annexure 16. The interlocutory application was allowed on 28.11.2013. So far the C.W.J.C. No. 2387 of 2008 and C.W.J.C. No. 11496 of 2008 are concerned they have been filed after the recall of the notification of promotion of the petitioners to the post of University Professor vide office order contained in memo no. 13/844 dated 5.5.2007.