Research › Search › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

2014 DIGILAW 284 (PAT)

Ram Kumar Singh v. State of Bihar

2014-02-24

SHIVAJI PANDEY

body2014
ORDER : 1. Since the issue involved in both the cases is common, with the consent of parties, they are being disposed of by this common order. 2. Dispute has been raised about the genuinity of teaching staff of D.K. Memorial College, Dumari, Buxar. There are two sets of persons alleging to be genuine teaching staff of the College. Allegation has been made that when the Government has taken a policy decision to provide financial aid to the College, the Managing Committee of the College started interpolating, committing forgery and manipulated of the records which deprived the genuine persons working in the College of the financial grant with a view to give undue advantage to choice persons, showing them as teaching staff of the College. In substance, allegation has been raised with regard to tampering and manipulation of records by the Managing Committee. 3. Earlier one Surya Nath Pandey and Bimlesh Kumar filed CWJC No. 2827 of 2012, this Court arrived to a conclusion that it involved disputed question of facts and disposed of the writ petition in the following terms:- "This Court cannot go into those disputed questions of fact in writ jurisdiction. Hence, the writ application is disposed of with liberty to the petitioners to represent the Director Higher Education (Respondent No. 5), who shall be obliged to get the matter enquired into in respect of teaching and non-teaching staff working in the College, who legally deserve release of salary from the grants and identify them and issue specific directions to the Management of the College to release salary to them from the grants received from the Government. The Director, Higher Education shall be at liberty to restrain the Management of the College from disbursing the fund of the College or grant received by the College pending such enquiry being held in the matter of the College." 4. The Director, Higher Education, vide impugned order disposed of the matter accepted the list of employees given by the Principal of the College as the teaching staff. 5. Counsel for the petitioners submits that there are two sets of claimants, one of those who have been appointed in the year 1981 and others who are alleged to have been appointed in the year 2004 onwards. 5. Counsel for the petitioners submits that there are two sets of claimants, one of those who have been appointed in the year 1981 and others who are alleged to have been appointed in the year 2004 onwards. The Director has not made any endeavor in terms of order of this Court, as aforesaid and without applying his independent mind and without making any enquiry, accepted the list of teaching staff furnished by the Principal of the College. 6. Counsel for the respondents, including the interveners tried to justify the order passed by the Director and submitted that with the limited resource he examined the mater and did not find any error in the list submitted by the Principal of the College. The Managing Committee was authorized to appoint persons and they have been shown by the Principal of the College and as such, the order passed by the Director does not call for any interference by this Court. 7. Counsel for the State at the same time submitted that the matter should be referred to the 3-Man Committee but to-day a counter affidavit has been filed by the University showing that all the previous orders passed by the acting Vice Chancellor are going to be withdrawn. 8. This Court is of the view that the Director while making enquiry has not applied his independent mind but merely accepted the list submitted by the Principal of the College. The enquiry means, it should show analysis of facts and consideration of the case of both sides but the order does not show that much. In this view of the matter, counsel for the State submits that the matter be referred to higher Official of Education Department who will examine the matter and will pass reasoned order. 9. In this view of the matter, the case of petitioners and others is referred to the Secretary level, as authorized by the Principal Secretary, Education Department, Government of Bihar. It goes without saying that before passing any order, he will given opportunity to all the parties who are going to be affected by his order and would pass a reasoned order in accordance with law. 10. It is also made clear that those persons who are working as on to-day will continue to work till the final order is passed. 10. It is also made clear that those persons who are working as on to-day will continue to work till the final order is passed. It is also directed that the grant which has been sent by the State Government will not be disbursed till the final decision. 11. Accordingly, these petitions are disposed of.