Binod Kumar Verma v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.4240 of 2020 ====================================================== Binod Kumar Verma son of Late Narendra Narayan Verma, resident of Madhopur, Nayatola, Town- Bariarpur Munger, P.S.- Basudeopur, P.O.- Basudeopur, District- Munger.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Ministry of Human Resources Development, Government of Bihar, Patna. 2.

The Director, Higher Education Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. 3.

The Tilka Manjhi Bhagalpur University through the Vice- Chancellor, Bhagalpur.

4.

The Registrar, The Tilka Manjhi Bhagalpur University, Bhagalpur. 5.

The Munger University through the Vice- Chancellor, Munger. 6.

The Registrar, Munger University, Munger.

7.

The Principal, Jamalpur College, Jamalpur, P.O.- Jamalpur, DistrictMunger. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Ratna Deep Prasad, Advocate For the University :

Mr.Ashhar Mustafa, Advocate Dr.Anand Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Smt. Binita Singh (SC 28) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH ORAL ORDER 10-04-2025 Heard Mr. Ratna Deep Prasad, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner; Mr. Ashhar Mustafa along with Dr. Anand Kumar, learned counsels for the University and Smt. Binita Singh, learned SC 28 for the State.

2. Mr. Ashhar Mustafa, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the University informs that as per the detail given in paragraph no.7 of the counter affidavit filed on behalf of respondent nos. 1 & 2, the petitioner has been paid a sum of Rs.27,06,330/- by the University but the petitioner has disputed the calculation by claiming that he may be paid a sum of Rs.36,17,854/-.

Patna High Court CWJC No.4240 of 2020(6) dt.10-04-2025 2/2

3. I find that the petitioner has filed a rejoinder to the counter affidavit mentioning therein that no detail has been given as to why the entire amount of Rs.36,17,854/- has not been paid and Rs.9,11,524/- still remains due to be paid along with the interest at the rate of 18 % per annum for delay.

4. Considering the informations as contained in the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the University, as well as, the rejoinder to the same filed on behalf of the petitioner, I find that the petitioner, if so advised, may approach the Registrar of the University for getting details in respect of the calculation and with respect to his grievance that Rs.9,11,524/- is still due to be paid along with the interest at the rate of 18 % per annum for delay.

5. In view of the above informations, the Registrar of the University is directed to call for the details in respect of nonpayment of Rs.36,17,854/-, in whole, and afford the opportunity to the petitioner so that he may get satisfied by the calculation.

6. With the above observation/direction, the present writ petition stands disposed of.

(Purnendu Singh, J) chn/- U