Ramjee Prasad Verma v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.5197 of 2021 ====================================================== 1.
Ramjee Prasad Verma Son of Late Baidyanath Prasad, resident of Aashayan 106 A, Chand Chaura, Gaya, Police Station Vishnupad, District - Gaya. 2.
Kavi Mohan Singh, Son of Late Shambhu Singh, resident of Ashok Nagar, Rampur, Police Station Rampur, District - Gaya. 3.
Muni Kishore Singh, Son of Late Rama Prasad Singh, resident of House No. 80, Patna Gaya Line, Railway Colony, Gaya, Police Station- Delha, District - Gaya.
4.
Jitendra Kumar, Son of Late Balram Prasad Singh, resident of House No. 101, Hanuman Nagar, Police Station Rampur, District - Gaya. 5.
Hafiz Ruknuddin Ahmad, Son of Late Hafiz Syed Masood Ahmad, Resident of Quazi Mohalla, Police Station Sherghati, District - Gaya. 6.
Amrendra Kumar Mishra, Son of Late Ranvijay Kumar Mishra, resident of L.I.G. 231, Shahid Bhagat Singh Colony, Mustafabad, Police Station Rampur, District - Gaya.
7.
Raj Gopalachari Pandey, Son of Late Shankar Dayal Pandey, resident of Gobal Bigha, Painpar, Police Line Road, Gaya, Police Station Rampur, District - Gaya.
8.
Om Prakash Singh, Son of Sri Kalpnath Singh, resident of Shyam Nagar Ghora Hospital, Police Station Jehanabad, District - Jehanabad. 9.
Arbind Kumar Singh, Son of Late Jharkhandi Prasad Singh, resident of Village Rerama, Sri Ram Path, Road No. 13, Police Station Daltenganj, District Palamu, Jharkhand.
10.
Brajesh Kumar Singh, Son of Late Suryadeo Singh, resident of Village Anewan, Police Station Kako, District - Jehanabad. 11.
Arvind Kumar Mishra, Son of Madhawanand Singh, resident of Village Noawan, Police Station Shakurabad, District - Jehanabad. 12.
Shiv Shankar Singh, Son of Ram Jeet Singh, resident of Village Ainwan, Police Station Kako, District - Jehanabad.
13.
Vishnu Shankar, Son of Sheo Mohan Singh, resident of Quarter No. 156, Anugrahpuri Colony, Police Station Rampur, District - Gaya. 14.
Lata Verma, Wife of Prof. Ranjeet Kumar Verma, Resident of House No. 69, Anugrahpuri Colony, Police Station Rampur, District - Gaya. 15.
Binay Kumar Verma, Son of Sarju Prasad, resident of Gauri Sadan, near Loyola Public School, Pant Nagar, Police Station Vishnupad, District - Gaya.
16.
Bishwanath Prasad, Son of Late Ram Kishore Prasad, resident of D-3/01 Barauni Refinery Township Begusarai, Police Station Thana Nagar, Begusarai, District - Begusarai.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Higher Education, Vikas
2/7 Bhawan, Patna.
2.
The Additional Secretary, Higher Education Department, Vikas Bhawan, Patna.
3.
The Magadh University through its the Registrar, Magadh University, Bodh Gaya.
4.
The Registrar, Magadh University, Bodh Gaya.
5.
The Bihar State University Service Commission, Budha Marg, Patna through its Secretary.
... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Rupak Kumar, Advocate Mr. Vikrant Kumar, Advocate For the Magadh University :
Mr. Sunit Kumar, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIBEK CHAUDHURI ORAL ORDER 25-11-2024 The petitioners are ad hoc teachers working against the sanctioned post in different colleges under Magadh University. The petitioners wanted to compete the recruitment process for selection and appointment of Assistant Professors in different disciplines in different colleges.
2. It is pertinent to note that in order to ascertain the eligibility of the petitioners an Inquiry Committee was set up under the name and style of Ad hoc Lecturer Inquiry Committee to assess the educational qualifications and sanctioned vacant posts against which the petitioners were working. The report suggests in "
ताललकासं. 10" that the petitioners were appointed as Assistant Professors on ad hoc basis against the sanctioned posts prior to 10th February 1989 on different dates. With regard to serial no. 21 of the said list, it is specifically opined that the said person,
3/7 namely, Hafiz Ruknuddin Ahmad who is petitioner no. 5 in the instant writ petition is permitted to appear in the selection list. Relevant column in respect of other teachers/petitioners were left vacant. However, the Committee after inquiry concluded as hereunder:- "(सभी प्रकार के दस्तावेजों के जोंचोपरांत यह पाया गया
12) का ववस्तृत वववरण उपलब्ध है। वक कुल 37 तदर व्याख्याताओं (ताललका सं. 10, 11 एवं 12) का ववस्तृत वववरण उपलब्ध हैI इस 37 व्याख्याताओं की वनियुवक 10.02.1989 के पूवर हुई है। इनिकी वनियुवक या तो व्याख्याता वनियुवक पररवनियम, 1983 के द्वारा या व्याख्याता पररवनियम, 1988 के द्वारा हुई है। इनि 37 में से ताललका सं० 10 के क्रम सं० 21 हावफिज रूकनिुद्दीनि अहमद BET, 1997 की परीक्षा भी उत्तीणर है। इसी प्रकार ताललका सं. 10 में डॉ. सतीशचंद्र पाठक के ववषय में कुलसचचव द्वारा सूचचत वकया गया है वक वे सेवावनिवृत हो चुके है जबवक फिॉमर्मेट में कायररत वदखाया गया है। इससे प्रतीत होता है वक कुलसचचव कायारलय तरा प्राचायर द्वारा भी तदर व्याख्यातांओं के फिॉमर्मेट में दी गयी सूचनिा का सही ढंग से जाँच निहीं हुई। कुल 37 तदर व्याख्याता न्यूनितम अहतार को पूरा करते है। लेवकनि ताललका सं.
10 में वदए गए 22 तदर व्याख्याताओं के बारे में सूचनिा दी गई वक वे खाली स्वीकृत पदों पर कायररत रे जजन्हें बाद में हटा वदया गया। इस ताललका के 22 तदर व्याख्याताओं की वनियुवक प्राचायर द्वारा की गई है वकन्तु यह वनियुवक राज्यपाल सचचवालय के पत्रांक सं. 155/OSD/GS(I) वदनिांक 21.12.1984 तरा मगध ववश्वववद्यालय के अचधसूचनिा सं० 586/G-1 वदनिांक 08.05.
4/7 ध्यानि में रखते हुऐ राज्यपाल सचचवालय का वनिदर्मेश रा वक स्वीकृत खाली पदों पर तदर व्याख्याता रखे जा सकते है। अतः स्पष्ट है की यह सभी 22 तदर व्याख्याता वनियमानिुसार कायररत रे। ताललका सं. 11 में क्रम सं. 01 डॉ. संजय कुमार ससह, स्वीकृत पद पर कायररत रे, जबवक इस ताललका में अन्य 13 तदर व्याख्याता के संबंध में स्वीकृत पद संबंचधत कोई सूचनिा निहीं है। ताललका सं. 11 (13 तदर व्याख्याता) तरा 12 (01 तदर व्याख्याता) अतः इनि 14 तदर व्याख्याताओं की वनियुवक स्वीकृत ररक पद पर हुई अरवा निहीं? इस सन्दभर में ववश्वववद्यालय निे कोई सूचनिा निहीं दी। ववश्वववद्यालय को अंचतम पत्र 31- 20(R) वदनिांक 09.06.
2020 के द्वारा सूचनिा मांगी गयी लेवकनि अघतनि कोई सूचनिा निहीं है। इनि सबो की वनियुवक प्राचायर द्वारा की गई है तरा कुलसचचव द्वारा जाँच सवमचत को उनिकी वनियुवक अनिुसंशशत की गयी है। अतः स्पष्ट है मगध ववश्वववद्यालय में तदर व्याख्याताओं की वास्तववक सस्रचत के अनिुसार ताललका सं. 10 जाँच के सभी शतर्तों को पूरा करता है और वनियुवक सही प्रतीत होता है। ताललका सं. 11 (13 तदर व्याख्याता) तरा 12 (01 तदर व्याख्याता) की भी सभी सूचनिाएँ सही प्रतीत होती है परन्तु वे स्रायी पद पर वनियुक रे, इसकी कोई सूचनिा निहीं है। (इस जाँच सवमचत को यह दाचयत्व वदया गया रा वक वे 10.02.
1989 तक वनियुक तदर्थं व्याख्याताओं की अहरता, आवश्यक योग्यता और स्वीकृत पद आवद की सत्यता की जाँच करें। सवमचत निे जाँच कर सस्रचत ररपोटर तैयार वकया है। उपरोक तदर व्याख्याताओं की सस्रचत ररपोटर (Status Report) के रूप में प्रस्तुत की जा रही है। तदर व्याख्याताओं की जाँच सवमचत सवरसहमचत से इस ररपोटर को आज 10.07.
5/7
3. The learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioners also refers to Annexure 9 of the rejoinder filed on behalf of the petitioners wherein petitioner no. 5 was given age relaxation in respect of taking part in the selection process as Assistant Professor only to contend that other petitioners being on the same footing are also entitled to have age relaxation. He also refers to a decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal Nos. 1601-1602 of 2004 (Veer Kunwar Singh University Ad hoc Teachers Association and Others Vs. The Bihar State University (C.C.) Service Commission & Others) decided on 18th May 2007.
In the aforesaid case also, the issue which came up for consideration before the Hon'ble Supreme Court is as to whether the appellants being the ad hoc teachers in different subjects under the University were entitled to have age relaxation for regularization. The Hon'ble Supreme Court held in paragraph 46 which runs thus:- "We therefore, are of the opinion that the interest of justice would be subserved if it is directed that the respondents herein in filling up of the vacant posts must take into consideration the cases of all those teachers also who have the requisite qualifications, upon relaxation of age, if permissible by law along with other eligible candidates.
6/7 however, direct that it would be open to the State of Bihar as also the concerned Universities to forthwith terminate the services of those teachers not working against sanctioned posts or who do not fulfill the requisite educational qualifications or whose services are otherwise not required."
4. The second part of the above order is not applicable for our case. In the instant case, we are concerned only if the petitioners are entitled to get age relaxation for their taking part in the selection process of regular Assistant Professors.
5. There was a specific direction on 26th September 2024 that the Bihar State University Service Commission would file counteraffidavit in the instant case, asserting their stand. However, in spite of service of notice, Bihar State University Service Commission did not appear to file their counter-affidavit.
6. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of Magadh University is present. It is frankly submitted by the learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the Magadh University that the ultimate call in this regard is to be taken by the Bihar State University Service Commission, therefore, Magadh University does not have anything to say though, they have filed counter-affidavit.
7. Having heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties and on careful perusals of the entire materials on record
7/7 and specially relying upon the aforesaid judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, this Court is of the view that the petitioners who were appointed as Ad hoc Assistant Professors against the sanctioned posts are eligible for age relaxation to take part in the selection process of Assistant Professors in the colleges run by Magadh University.
8. The commission is directed to allow the petitioners to take part in the on-going selection process.
9. Accordingly, the instant writ petition is disposed of with above order.
(Bibek Chaudhuri, J) Suraj Dubey/- U