Dr. Mona Bala v. The Patna University
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Letters Patent Appeal No.619 of 2025 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.434 of 2022 ====================================================== Dr. Mona Bala Daughter of Sri Yogendra Prasad Sinha Resident of MohallaKadamkuan, Police Station- Kadamkuan District-Patna. ... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1.
The Patna University through Vice-Chancellor, Patna University, Patna. 2.
The Vice Chancellor, Patna University, Patna. 3.
The Registrar, Patna University, Patna.
4.
Dr. Sudha Mishra Wife of not Known the then Head of Department, Sanskrit, Patna, University, Patna.
5.
The Head of the Department, Department of Sanskrit, Patna University, Patna.
... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Appellant/s :
Mr. Ram Shankar Prasad, Advocate For the Respondent/s :
Mr. Md. Nadim Seraj, GP-5 For the University :
Mr. Mani Dhari Singh, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) Date : 09-01-2026 This Letters Patent Appeal has been filed by the appellant Dr. Mona Bala challenging the order dated 01.05.2025 passed by the learned Single Judge in CWJC No. 434 of 2022. The petitioner/appellant had approached this Court by filing a writ petition with the following prayer :- "1. That this is an application for issuance of writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent no. 3, the Registrar, Patna University, Patna for issuance of Teaching
2/4 Experience Certificate on the basis of Teaching Experience Certificate issued by the Head of the department, Sanskrit, (Respondent no.-4), Patna University in favour of the petitioner for the period from 15.10.2015 to 16.10.2020 as contained in Annexure-2 to the writ petitioner bearing letter no. S/PU/20/59 dated 16.10.2020 and further, to return the original copy of Annexure-2 which was submitted before the Respondent no-3 for consideration of issuance of Teaching Experience Certificate And/ or issue other writ/ writs or order/ orders or direction/ directions for the just decision of the case."
2. The respondents were issued notice in the matter and counter affidavit was filed by the respondents. The Head of the Department, Sanskrit, Patna University, Patna (Respondent No. 4 in the writ petition) filed the counter affidavit wherein it is stated that the appellant was not officially appointed by the University nor by the HoD, Sanskrit on any teaching post. It is further stated that she was never officially appointed by the University on any teaching post. In order to gain teaching experience, she was engaged in PG classes from 15.10.2015 to 24.07.2019 during PHD and after PHD on an honorary basis. It is further stated that as per the directions obtained by the Office of the Registrar, a meeting of Department Council was held to discuss the matter relating to the appellant and it was
3/4 unanimously decided that the certificate which was issued to the petitioner was an honorary one and it was not sent by the PG Department of Sanskrit in the Office of the Registrar for issuing experience certificate. The learned Single Judge after considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the respective parties and going through the counter affidavits, has been pleased to hold as follows :- "20. The petitioner's claim for a formal teaching experience certificate from the Registrar of the Patna University lacks legal basis. In the absence of formal appointment letter, payment of salary, attendance register or any service record maintained by the University, it is difficult for this Court to direct the Statutory Authority to issue certificate, contrary to be University's circular, norms and procedures."
3. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that since the appellant was taking some classes, which is not in dispute, therefore, the experience certificate should have been issued in favour of the appellant and thus the denial of such certificate was not justified. However, the learned counsel does not dispute that there was no formal appointment letter issued by the University to the appellant nor she was given any salary nor there was any attendance register in which she had signed or any service record maintained by the University. Nothing was
4/4 produced before the learned Single Judge or before this Court that the Statutory Authority is empowered to issue experience certificate also in favour of the person who has taken few classes in the University without having been appointed. Therefore, if the act of non-issuance of the experience certificate by the University is not against any circular, law or any procedure, we do not find any fault with the impugned order of the learned Single Judge. Moreover, in view of the limited scope of interference in the Letters Patent Appeal, we find no perversity in the impugned order and, therefore, we are not inclined to interfere with the same.
4. The Letters Patent Appeal is, accordingly, dismissed.
5. Interlocutory Application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.
(Sangam Kumar Sahoo, CJ) (Sudhir Singh, J) Anushka/- AFR/NAFR CAV DATE N/A Uploading Date 12.01.2026 Transmission Date