RAM BILAS YADAV Vs. THE STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the parties.

(2.) In the present writ petition, petitioner is challenging the notification, contained in Memo No. V.C.O.-025/11 dated 4.8.2011 (Annexure-8) issued by the Registrar, B.N. Mandal University, Madhepura by which the eligibility of the petitioner to be appointed as lecturer has been shifted to 24.8.1991 from the original dated 22.8.1977, also directed to recover the excess amount paid to the petitioner. Further prayer has been made by the petitioner that he should be treated as was appointed as lecturer on 12.8.1977 against the sanctioned post and no excess payment was made to him by discharging the duty in the services of the University.

(3.) For deciding this issue it will be relevant to state some essential facts for the adjudication of the case. As per petitioner, he was appointed as lecturer on 12.8.1977 in the department of Political Science in K.B. Jha College, Katihar and his services was approved by Bihar College Service Commission. There was number of litigations in the College, the matter went to Honourable Supreme Court. The Honourable Supreme Court constituted one man enquiry committee known as Justice S.C. Agrawala Commission and Justice S.C. Agrawala Commission has submitted its report to the Honourable Supreme Court and from the extract of the report (Annexure-1) it appears that name of the petitioner is at sl.no. 10 subject has been shown Political Science, date of appointment has been shown as 12.8.1977 and nature of post has been shown as sanctioned post. Justice S.C. Agrawala Commission submitted its report before Honourable Supreme Court and said report was accepted in to without any modification and that case has been reported in 2005(1) PLJR 464 SC ( State of Bihar and others Vs. Bihar Rajya M.S.E.S.K.K. Mahasangh and others) . It will be relevant to mention here that Justice Agrawala Commission has also given notice to the College to produce materials whatever available with the College, the Commission recorded the finding on eligibility and date of appointment 12.8.1977 and the College never disputed ever before the Commission or before Honourable Supreme Court that petitioner was not appointed or not eligible for appointment on 12.8.1977. It will be relevant to quote paragraph 17 and 70 of the aforesaid judgment: