Kumar Virendra Sinha v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.1437 of 2013 IN Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 8836 of 2012 =========================================================== Kumar Virendra Sinha S/o Late Rajendra Prasad R/o E - 103 Monica Apartment, Khajpura, P.S. Shastri Nagar, District - Patna .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar Through Dr. Sita Ram Singh, Director Higher Education, Govt. of Bihar, Patna

2. Sri Devanand Kunwar, The Hon'Ble Chancllor, Raj Bhawan, Patna

3. The Magadh University Bodh Gaya Through Sri D.K. Yadav, Registrar

4. Sri Arun Kumar, The Vice Chancellor, Magadh Univesities Bodh Gaya Null Null

5. Sri D.K. Yadav, Registrar, Magadh Universities Bodh Gaya Null Null

6. Sri D.K. Sinha, The Finance Officer, Magadh Universities Bodh Gaya .... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 13-02-2015 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the opposite parties.

The present contempt application is filed for noncompliance of order dated 07.05.2012 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 8836 of 2012 whereunder the aforesaid writ application of the petitioner was disposed of with a direction to the University authorities to consider the representation of the petitioner and fix up his pay scale pursuant to the said notification of the University dated 20.04.2011 and pass orders for payment of arrears of his salary from the next grant received by the University from the Government in this regard. Learned counsel for the Magadh University and its

Patna High Court MJC No.1437 of 2013 dt.13-02-2015 2/2 officials opposite parties no. 3 to 6 submits that in compliance of the order dated 07.05.2012 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 8836 of 2012, representation of the petitioner has been duly considered by the Registrar, Magadh University, Body Gaya and disposed of the representation vide order dated 15.12.2014 denying his claim. As such, the order has been complied.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that claim of the petitioner, as set out in the representation, has not been considered properly in accordance with law. In view of the above submission, since the order under contempt has been decided by opposite parties, the contempt application is disposed of.

However, if the petitioner is aggrieved by the decision of the University, he may take recourse in accordance with law. (Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J.) Shail/- U