BRAJ KISHORE SINGH Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent of the Patna High Court is directed against judgment and order of a Learned Single Judge of this Court in CWJC No. 497 of 1994, the contraversy relates to approval of Services of the appellants on class III/IV posts in Jagdam College, Chapra. The appeal was taken up for hearing before a Division Bench on August 21, 1996. The Bench noticed that there are conflicting decisions on the point and directed the appeal to be heard by full Bench. That is how this matter came up for hearing before this Bench. The relevant facts are as follows.

(2.) Jagdam College, Chapra (hereinafter called 'the College') was an affiliated college of Bihar University (now known as Babasaheb Bhimrao Ambedkar University). On February 7, 1976 it was made a constituent Unit of the said University with effect from April 1,1975. The college is now a constituent unit of Jai Prakash University. According to the appellants prior to January 17,1973 20 sanctioned posts of class III and 43 sanctioned posts of class IV were in existence. On January 17, 1973 9 class III posts and 13 class IV posts were created. Thus, 29 class HI posts and 56 class IV posts were available in the college. On November 29, 1977 the Bihar University constituted a Selection Committee comprising of the Principal and three Senior Professors, for appointment against vacant class III/IV posts. In August 1978 advertisement was published. In March 1979 appointments were made including those of the appellants. According to them, prior to March 1979,21 (out of 29) class III posts and 43 (out of 56) class IV posts had already been filled and, thus, 9 class III posts and 13 class IV posts were vacant against.which the aforesaid appointments were made. On March 2,1981,the University approved the appointments and by letter dated September 14,1981 forwarded the same to the State Government for its approval. The appellants started getting salary. On June 8, 1983, however, the State Government refused to approve their appointments on the ground that appointments were beyond the staffing pattern.

(3.) The appellants filed representations and ultimately came to this Court by way of a writ petition in CWJC No.497 of 1984, which has given rise to this appeal. From the judgment of the Learned Single Judge it appears that apart from the plea of discrimination (it is said that appointments made in other colleges, subsequent to the appellants, have been approved) a stand was taken on behalf of the appellants that they would be satisfied if direction similar to the one issued by this Court in CWJC No. 3790 of 1985 (Kiran Prakash Gupta & ors. v. State of Bihar & ors.) and CWJC No. 5647 of 1990 (Shashi Ranjan Kumar Shukla v. State of Bihar & ors.) disposed of on May 22,1992 is issued to the State Government to consider the recommendation of the University for sanctioning the post of non-teaching staff, and to scrutinise the cases of the appellants against the sanctioned posts. The Learned Single Judge, however, held that the present case stood on different footing inasmuch as the impugned appointments had been made after the college had become a constituent unit of the University, and in- view of the provisions of Section 35 and Section 10 (5) of the Bihar State Universities Act, 1976 (called 'Universities Act', in short), appointments could not have been made against un- sanctioned posts. The Learned Single Judge further noted that in the cases of Kiran Prakash Gupta and Shashi Ranjan Kumar Shukla (supra) the direction had been issued on concession of the Counsel for the University, in view of the fact that the appointments in those cases had been made before the college was affiliated and they were, therefore, not subject to the restrictive provisions of the Universities Act The order of the Supreme Court in Writ Petition No. 409 of 1991 directing the Ranchi University/State Government to take immediate steps to determine the staffing pattern and to take final decision within the fixed time-frame was also distinguished on the ground that the order had been passed under Article 142 of the Constitution. The Learned Single Judge, instead, followed the Bench decision of this Court in CWJC No. 10378 of 1993 (Sukhsagar Prasad and ors. v. State of Bihar & ors., (Reported in 1994 (2) BLJ 196) disposed of on March 23, 1994 on the scope of Section 35 of the Universities Act and certain other decisions of this Court as well as the Supreme Court holding that appointments made contrary to the provisions of the Statute are violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution and no relief can be granted to the persons concerned, declined to issue any favourable direction with respect to the appellants. The appellants have come in Letters Patent Appeal against the said judgment and order of the Learned Single Judge.