UNIVERSITY OF BIHAR Vs. RAJENDRA SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application by the University of Bihar through its Registrar, and the Principal, Munshi Singh College, Motihari, under Section 115 of the Civil P. C. is directed against the order dated the 10th Jan., 1977, passed in Misc. Appeal No. 5 of 1976 by the Additional District Judge, confirming the order dated the 16th Jan., 1976 passed by the Additional Subordinate Judge, Motihari in Title Suit No 17 of 1974, directing the petitioners to pay a sum of Rs. 8, 250/- to Shri Rajendra Singh, plaintiff-opposite party, who is a Demonstrator in the said college towards his salary. Being aggrieved by the order of the learned Subordinate Judge, the petitioner preferred an appeal. The Appellate Court also by its order, as mentioned earlier, has affirmed the order passed by the trial Court. Hence, this Civil Revision.

(2.) Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners has assailed the impugned orders of the courts below and has urged that the said orders are bad as the Courts below failed to consider that the opposite party had not established a prima facie case nor there was balance of convenience in favour of the opposite party nor he had suffered irreparable injuries which could not have been measured in terms of money. He drew my attention to the provisions under order 39, Rules 1 and 2 of the Civil P. C. (hereinafter referred to as "the Code"). In order to substantiate his contention, he has referred to para 7 of the order of the trial court which reads thus:

(3.) Reference in this connection may be made to the undertaking given by the plaintiff-opposite party itself to the effect that "no payment will be made unless University approved his continuance and sanctioned payment." It is expected that the Public Service Commission would expedite the case of the petitioner regarding concurrence. In the circumstance, therefore, I modify the directions given by the court below and instead of directing the petitioners to pay Rs. 8,250/- to the opposite party by way of salary, I direct the petitioners to deposit Rupees 8,000/- as an ad hoc payment in the trial court by the 30th Nov., 1977. It shall be open to the opposite party to withdraw the said amount from the court after furnishing securities to the satisfaction of the trial court. Before I part with the case, I wish to make a further direction that the suit may be expedited and the petitioners should also be directed to send a reminder soon to the Public Service Commission for expediting the case of the plaintiff opposite party. In the result, the application is dismissed with the above modification. In the circumstance, however, there will be no order of the cost.