Dr. Janardan Yadav v. The B. N. Mandal University And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 14692 of 2016 =============================================== Dr. Janardan Yadav, Son of Late Tanuk Lal Yadav, Resident of Village-Mojampatti, P.S.-Bahara Kothi, District-Purnea. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The B. N. Mandal University, Madhepura through its Registrar.

2. The Vice-Chancellor, B.N. Mandal University, Madhepura.

3. The Registrar, B.N. Mandal University, Madhepura. ... ... Respondent/s =============================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Pramod Mishra, Adv. For the Respondent/s: Mr. Raju Giri, Adv.

=============================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE RAVI RANJAN ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 20-07-2017 IA No. 1229 of 2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. This Interlocutory Application has been filed for expunging the name of sole petitioner, Dr. Janardan Yadav who died on 12.10.2016 leaving behind his widow namely Manorma Devi who has also filed Vakalatnama.

In the facts and circumstances of the case, the Interlocutory Application is allowed and the name of the petitioner be expunged and in his place the name of his widow namely Manorma Devi be substituted.

CWJC No. 14692 of 2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State.

Patna High Court CWJC No.14692 of 2016() dt.20-07-2017 2/2 Through this writ petition, the original petitioner sought direction to respondents concerned to pay his revise pension and other retiral dues on the basis of new revised pay scale w.e.f. 01.01.2016 who retired from service on 31.01.2009 from the post of Principal, M.L. Arya College, Kasba, Purnea. Accordingly, this writ petition is being disposed of with liberty to the petitioner, Manorma Devi to file detailed representation regarding the claim before the respondent no. 3, i.e., the Registrar, B.N. Mandal University, Madhepura who shall consider the same on its own merit and in accordance with law and take decision expeditiously and preferably within a period of two months from the filing of such representation. If the petitioner's claim finds favour then consequential payment should be made within a further period of two months. However, if the petitioner's claim is not admissible then a reasoned order would be required to be passed by the respondent no. 3 and the same should be communicated to the petitioner.

( Dr. Ravi Ranjan, J.) Vikash/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date 01.08.2017 Transmission Date NA