Dr. Om Prakash v. The Union Of India And ORS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Letters Patent Appeal No.347 of 2016 Arising out of Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 13225 of 2014 Along with Interlocutory Application No. 1417 of 2016 And Interlocutory Application No.1419 of 2016 And Interlocutory Application No. 6497 of 2016 =========================================================== Dr. Om Prakash, Son of Sri Ram Das, Resident of Professor Quarter, NIT Campus, Ashok Raj, Path, P.S.- Pirbahore, Distric- Patna. .... .... Writ Petitioner No.5- Appellant/s
Versus
1. The Union of India through the Secretary ( Higher Education), Ministry of Human Resources Development, Government of India, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi.
2. The Deputy Secretary ( N.I.T.'S) Ministry of Human Resources Development, Government of India, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi.
3. The Chairman, Board of Governors of National Institutes of Technology, Ashok Raj Path, Patna.
4. The Director, N.I.T. Patna- cum- Chairman Selection Committee, National Institute of Technology, Ashok Raj Path, Patna.
5. Board of Governor's of National Institute ot Technology through its Registrar, Ashok Raj Path, Patna.
6. National Institute of Technology, Patna through its Registrar, Ashok Raj Path, Patna.
.... Respondents-Respondents
7. Dr. Lal Bahadur Roy, FIE, Son of Sri Jaldhar Roy, Resident of 301, Madhukunj Apartment, Near Forest Office, Nehru Nagar, P.S. Patliputra, District- Patna.
8. Dr. Shambhu Sharan Mishra, Son of Late Shiv Shankar Mishra, Resident of 303, Bhawani Palace, Anandpuri, P.S.- Sri Krishna Puri, District- Patna.
9. Dr. Sawal Kishore Singh, Son of Sri Ambika Prasad Sharma, Resident of Purvi Laxmi Nagar, Khemnichak, P.S.- Ram Krishna Nagar, District- Patna.
10. Dr. Vivekanand Singh, Son of Late Bhubneshwar Prasad Singh, Resident of Professor Quarter, NIT Campus, Ashok Raj, Path, P.S.- Pirbahore, DistricPatna.
11. Dr. Amar Nath Sinha, Son of Sri Nawin Kumar Ambastha, Resident of Flat No. 311/e. Jyotipuram Apartment, Jagdeo Path Golambar, Bailey Road, P.S.- Shastri Nagar, District- Patna.
.... .... Writ Petitioners-Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Dhruba Mukherjee, Sr. Advocate Md. Nazir Ansari, Advocate For the UOI : Mr. Rajesh Kumar Verma, CGC For the NIT : Mr. Y.V.Giri, Sr. Advocate Mr. Ashish Giri, Advocate ===========================================================
2/4 CORAM: HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE And HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE) Date: 22-02-2017 Re.: Interlocutory Application No.1417 of 2016 The application is for condonation of delay of 268 days in filing of the present Letters Patent Appeal.
2. For the reasons mentioned in the application, we find that sufficient cause is made out for condonation of delay. Consequently, we condone the delay in filing of the present Letters Patent Appeal.
3.
Interlocutory Application stands allowed accordingly.
Re: Interlocutory Application No.1419 of 2016, & Interlocutory Application No. 6497 of 2016:
Both the Interlocutory Applications have been filed seeking leave of this Court to bring on record certain additional documents.
Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, let the additional documents be taken on record.
Interlocutory Applications stand allowed.
3/4 Re.: Letters Patent Appeal No.347 of 2016 The present Letters Patent Appeal is directed against an order passed by the learned Single Bench of this Court on 30th March, 2015 whereby, challenge to an order of recovery of the excess amount paid to the appellants as Assistant Professor (Associate Professor) remained unsuccessful.
2. Learned counsel for the parties agree that similar question came up before this Court in Letters Patent Appeal No.1840 of 2015 [ Dr. (Mrs.) Kalpana Sinha Versus The Union of India & Ors.] decided on 18th of May, 2016, wherein this Court has accepted the similar claim as that of the appellants and the recovery effected from the salary of the appellant in the aforesaid case was ordered to be refunded with all consequential benefits.
3. Learned counsel for respondent nos.3 to 6 states that the said judgment of this Court is subject matter of appeal before the Supreme Court arising out of Special Leave to Appeal (C) No.19076/2016 wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court has observed that in the event of the petitioners' success (respondents herein), they can recover the excess amount, if any, paid to the appellants herein.
4. In view of the said fact, the order passed by the learned Single Bench of this Court on 30th of March, 2015 is set
4/4 aside and the present Letters Patent Appeal is allowed in terms of the reasoning recorded in Letters Patent Appeal No.1840 of 2015 and in the same terms. However, the same shall be subject to the decision of the appeal arising out of Special Leave to Appeal (C) No.19076/2016 and subject to the right of recovery by the respondents as permitted by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the order dated 25th July, 2016.
(Hemant Gupta, ACJ) (Sudhir Singh, J) S.Pandey/- AFR/NAFR N. A. F. R CAV DATE N. A.
Uploading Date 01.03.2017 Transmission Date