Pankaj Kumar Singh v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 12988 of 2018 =========================================================== Pankaj Kumar Singh, Son of Late Hirday Narayan Singh, Resident of MohallaMaharshi Nagar, Gali No. 1, Post Office- Godda, Police Station- Godda, DistrictGodda. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through Commissioner-cum-Secretary Human Resources Department (Higher Education) Government of Bihar, Patna.

2. The Lalit Narayan Mithila University, Kameshwar Nagar, Darbhanga through its Registrar.

3. The Vice-Chancellor, Lalit Narayan Mithila University Kameshwar Nagar, Darbhanga.

4. The Finance Officer, Lalit Narayan Mithila University, Kameshwar Nagar, Darbhanga.

5. The Principal, Dr. L.K.V.D., College, Tajpur, Samastipur. .... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ranjan Kumar, Advocate For the L.N.M.U.

:

Dr. Anshuman, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Shashi Sekher Tiwary, A.C. to A.A.G. 15 =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 13-09-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner; State and L.N. Mithila University (hereinafter referred to as the 'University').

2. By order dated 23.08.2018, the Court had indicated that it was of the opinion that strict order be passed but had granted one indulgence fixing the matter for today for the University to file further affidavit showing payment of the admitted dues indicating that failure may result in direction for personal appearance and imposition of cost.

3. Learned counsel for the University submitted that the order was communicated to the authorities on 26.08.2018 and

Patna High Court CWJC No.12988 of 2018 dt.13-09-2018 2/3 pursuant thereto, he received instructions on 11.09.2018, but the same did not specify whether the amount was actually paid for which he has again written to the authorities concerned. However, from the instructions, it appears that under each head, the University had made payment.

4. Though, learned counsel for the University has correctly not filed the affidavit as did not give details of the payment and the authorities are obliged to bring details showing actual payment but in view of the fact that learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner does not dispute the position, the writ petition stands disposed off.

5. However, the Court would give liberty to the petitioner to file a detailed representation before the Registrar of the University, if he feels that any amount due to him still remains unpaid. If such a representation is filed within four weeks from today, the Registrar shall look into the matter and after getting it verified from the records pass a reasoned order within four weeks from the date of filing of the representation. If in terms of the order passed, any further payment is required to be made to the petitioner, the same shall also be paid to him within the next four weeks.

6. In the meantime, learned counsel for the University shall also communicate to the University authorities to ensure that

Patna High Court CWJC No.12988 of 2018 dt.13-09-2018 3/3 with regard to the payments indicated in the instructions sent to him, the same are also actually credited into the account of the petitioner, if already not done, without any delay.

(Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J.) P. Kumar AFR/NAFR U