Judgment 1. This letters patent appeal challenges the order dated 31 January 2003 on CWJC. No, 13022 of 2002 : Dr. Eqbal Akhtar vs. The Vice Chancellor and Ors. 2. At the outset, the court records that it had indicated to learned counsel for the appellant that the court does not want to pass an order in this matter for no other reason than the petitioner-appellant has status of a Professor at the University, now retired. The petitioner-appellant took an inequitable plea in a writ petition notwithstanding that he retired, continued to present himself at the University and was paid salary beyond the period of retirement. 3. The petitioner-appellant was born on 25 December 1938. He retired at the age of 60 years on 25.12.1998. Instead the petitioner-appellant continued to work up to 30 June 1999 and withdrew his salary. The petitioner-appellant also resisted in submitting his original matriculation certificate inspite being called by the University repeatedly to present it. 4. Thus, any situation which has emerged that the petitioner-appellant may have obtained salary beyond his date of retirement is a circumstance for which he himself is responsible. 5. Counsel for the petitioner-appellant also cites the case of Most. Kanti Devi and Ors. V/s. The State of Bihar and Ors., 2003 (1) PLJR 9 . This case is hardly applicable to the circumstances of an educated Professor. Most. Kanti Devi was a widow of an illiterate Chowkidar. 6. The Court does not find any error in the order of the learned Judge on the writ petition. 7. Dismissed.