ORAL ORDER The present facts are stranger than fiction. This Court has reason to observe so from the pleading of the petitioner itself and what has emerged from the counter affidavit of the University. The manner, in which the Higher Education has been imparted and the way the Teachers of the University have functioned, has already been noticed by this Court in various litigations as also commented upon in various orders. Even the present case is one of those cases where the Court cannot hold itself back from recording its opinion the manner in which the affairs of the University have been conducted. 2. Petitioners were senior Teachers in different Departments at A.N.D College, Shahpur Patory in the district of Samastipur. They have now retired. They have approached the Court because the respondent authorities of L. N. Mithila University are not willing to give them the benefit of financial kind for 131 days of unutilized earned leave which the petitioners claim they are entitled to by engaging in extra classes. 3. The brief background is that the University Teachers went on a prolonged strike of 131 days, between 1st August, 2000 to 10th December, 2000. This virtually works out to four months of strike. After the strike was called off, the Government took a strict view of the matter. Only way this period of strike could be adjusted was if the Teaches of the University had adequate earned leave against their account or at the most, if they could take extra classes and satisfy the authority about holding of such extra classes to cover up the loss. 4. In CWJC No.6241 of 2013 as well as other writs, a blanket piece of certification has been obtained from the Principal of the College in question saying that the petitioners had taken extra classes. This, according to the petitioners, entitles them for 131 days of earned leave. 5. The stand of the University is that across the board, no evidence of taking extra classes has been provided by any of the Teachers. A blanket kind of certification has been obtained from the concerned institution saying that the extra classes have been taken. This, according to the petitioners, entitles them for 131 days of earned leave. 5. The stand of the University is that across the board, no evidence of taking extra classes has been provided by any of the Teachers. A blanket kind of certification has been obtained from the concerned institution saying that the extra classes have been taken. In absence of any clear evidence and proof of having taken or conducted extra classes, 131 days of earned leave cannot accrue to the petitioners or such persons, for the reason that money from public exchequer cannot be dispensed with on mere asking as dole. 6. The academic session of the year 2000 was virtually ruined by the indiscretion of going on strike by Teachers for more than four months. Academic calendar of any University lasts for only nine months as the rest of the period goes in various vacations. If four months of strike subsisted in that year, how was the course completed? How the examination was conducted and how the students fared is not for the Court to investigate but then the Court can safely infer that mere formalities of completion of academic calendar must have been performed. 7. Further 131 days of extra classes must have been taken on the basis of some record, not only of the attendance of the Teachers, who claim taking such extra classes but even attendance of the students who attended those extra classes. Four months is a significant period of time. How and when 131 days of extra classes have been taken and then adjusted when teachers find it difficult even in holding regular lectures and maintaining academic calendar is still a mystery as well as puzzling to this Court. This Court, therefore, comes to a considered opinion that the certificate, which the Principals are dishing out to the Teachers, are not worthy of the piece of paper utilized for the purpose. They can never form the basis for the purpose of certifying that the petitioners or such Teachers had taken extra classes of 131 days. This Court, therefore, comes to a considered opinion that the certificate, which the Principals are dishing out to the Teachers, are not worthy of the piece of paper utilized for the purpose. They can never form the basis for the purpose of certifying that the petitioners or such Teachers had taken extra classes of 131 days. The Court, therefore, will not give a mandamus upon the respondents to pay to any such Teachers any benefit of 131 days of earned leave on mere certification of a Principal of a college or any authority of any institution in absence of clear proof or evidence of having performed such onerous or responsible duty of taking extra classes. 8. The factum is not established in the present case because the petitioner of CWJC No.6241 of 2013 has accepted in the supplementary affidavit that he has no evidence beyond the Principal’s certificate. Therefore, there cannot be any occasion to give a direction for grant of such benefit to the petitioners on the face value. 9. The Court further makes it clear to the Vice Chancellor not only of L. N. Mithila University but all other Universities that 131 days of earned leave will not accrue to any Teacher as a matter of course unless clear evidence of attendance not only of the Teachers but also of the students participation is established. There must be unimpeachable evidence as to when those extra classes were held. Till such evidence can be produced by such Teachers, no University would be entitled to dish out money on a mere asking. 10. Let a copy of this order be communicated not only to the Principal Secretary, Education, Government of Bihar but even to the Secretary of Hon’ble Chancellor of the Universities of Bihar for communication to all Vice Chancellors of the Universities of the State of Bihar. 11. Writ applications are dismissed with the above observation/ direction.