Bishwa Nath Singh v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.610 of 2015 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.18638 of 2010 ====================================================== Bishwa Nath Singh, son of Late Surya Narayan Singh, resident of MohallaPokharia, Near Kali Asthan, P.S. - Begusarai, District Begusarai.. Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar .

2. Sri Amarjeet Sinha, the Principal Secretary, Higher Education, Govt. of Bihar, New Secretariat, Patna.

3. Sri Saket Kushwaha, Presently posted as Vice - Chancellor, L.N.M. University Darbhanga.

4. Sri Ajit Kumar Singh, Presently posted as Registrar, L.N.M. University, Darbhanga.

5. Sri Shushil Choudhary, the Finance Officer L.N.M. University, Darbhanga.

6. Sri, Tapan Kumar Sandilya, Presently posted as Principal, Co-operative College, Begusari. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Shashi Bhushan Singh For the Respondent/s :

Mr.Gp3 S.K.Jha ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPADHYAY ORAL ORDER 02-01-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the counsel appearing on behalf of the State as well as learned counsel for the University.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that petitioner has been discriminated by the University in the matter of payment of difference of D.A., earned leave and other post-retiral dues as well as interest permissible under the rules.

He submits that similarly circumstanced others have been granted the benefit but in the matter of calculation of postretiral dues of this petitioner, the University has adopted

Patna High Court MJC No.610 of 2015(5) dt.02-01-2019 2/2 discriminatory attitude. They have committed gross contempt. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the University would submit that in terms of direction of this Court, representation of the petitioner has been addressed by the University and payments have been made.

Having regard to the scope of contempt jurisdiction, the Court is not inclined to proceed any further, however, liberty shall be available to the petitioner to approach the competent authority including the Court and raise grievance as to the discrimination in the matter of payment of post-retiral dues as the State and its instrumentality University cannot adopt pick and choose.

Considering the aforesaid, the present contempt application is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to approach the appropriate forum/court for redressal of his grievance as to the discrimination in the matter of payment of post-retiral dues.

With the aforesaid, the present application stands disposed of.

(Anil Kumar Upadhyay, J) Ravi/- U