Dr.Jagdish Prasad v. Magadh University And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.8366 of 2011 ====================================================== Dr. Jagdish Prasad S/o Late Sheoratan Prasad , Resident Of Village Bandhubigha, P.O. Paraiya, District - Gaya At Present Mohalla Habibpura, P.O. Sohsarai, District - Nalanda .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. Magadh University , Bodh Gaya, P.O. - Bodh Gaya, District - Gaya Through The Vice-Chancellor

2. The Vice-Chancellor, Magadh University, Bodh Gaya, P.O. - Bodh Gaya, District - Gaya

3. The Registrar, Magadh University, Bodh Gaya, P.O. - Bodh Gaya, District - Gaya

4. The Finance Officer, Magadh University, Bodh-Gaya, P.O.- Bodh Gaya, District - Gaya

5. The Principal Kisan College, Sohsarai, District - Nalanda A Constituent Unit Of Magadh University, Bodh Gaya, Gaya .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

For the Respondent/s :

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 05-04-2016 Heard Sri Bal Bhushan Chaudhary, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Pranav Kumar, learned counsel for the respondent no. 1 to 4/ officials of the Magadh University. In the present petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has mainly prayed for directing the respondents to pay arrears of differential salary on account of 5th Pay Commission. Of -course, prayer was also made for directing for payment along with interest. By way of filing counter affidavit, the respondent/

Patna High Court CWJC No.8366 of 2011 (7) dt.05-04-2016 2/2 Magadh University has taken a stand that all the admitted dues have already been paid in accordance with law. Earlier, time was granted for filing reply to the counter affidavit. However, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that despite his best effort, he is not in a position to file reply. He further submits that in view of the facts disclosed in the counter affidavit, the writ petition may be disposed of with an indication that if still any grievance exists, petitioner would be entitled to approach the authority concerned.

In view of the statement made by learned counsel for the petitioner, there is no need to keep the matter pending. The writ petition stands disposed of with indication that if petitioner feels that any grievance still exists, he would be at liberty to approach the authority concerned. (Rakesh Kumar, J) Praful/- U T