JUDGMENT Pramath Patnaik, J. - Heard Mr. (Dr.) Shree Krishna Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Sanjay Piprawall, learned counsel for the RespondentKolhan University, Mr. A. K. Mehta, learned counsel for the Respondent-Ranchi University, Mr. Pankaj Kumar, learned counsel for the Respondent No. 5 as well as Mr. A. Allam, learned senior counsel appearing for the Respondent-J.P.S.C. 2. In the captioned writ application, prayer of the petitioner is for a direction upon the respondents to promote the petitioner to the post of University Professor w.e.f. 3.12.1991 considering his qualification, achievement and experience with all consequential benefits from the date of his due promotion. 3. The facts, as has been averred in the writ application, in a nutshell, is that the petitioner was appointed as a Lecturer in the Department of Commerce in Workers College, Jamshedpur, a constituent unit of Ranchi University w.e.f. 3.12.1975 and subsequently he was absorbed on permanent basis vide Ranchi University Memo dated 21.12.1982. It has been averred that the petitioner, subsequent to absorption in regular service of the Ranchi University on the recommendation of Bihar Public Service Commission with the approval of the Chancellor, was confirmed in the service of University vide Ranchi University Memo dated 27.10.1984, wherein, the petitioner''s name figures at serial No. 91. The petitioner was subsequently promoted to the post of Reader on permanent basis under the provision of Bihar State Universities Act, 1976 under time bound promotion scheme on the recommendation of the Bihar State University Service Commission, Patna vide Ranchi University Memo dated 21.12.1995 w.e.f. 7.1.1987, wherein, the petitioner''s name figures at serial no. 3 and the petitioner objected to this anomalous date of promotion w.e.f. 7.1.1987 instead of 3.12.1985. It has been averred that the petitioner was confirmed as Reader w.e.f. 7.1.1987 vide Ranchi University Memo dated 19.1.1996 (serial no. 43) and the petitioner got his own Ph. D. degree in 1983 and his result was published vide Ranchi University Memo dated 28.01.1983. 3 and the petitioner objected to this anomalous date of promotion w.e.f. 7.1.1987 instead of 3.12.1985. It has been averred that the petitioner was confirmed as Reader w.e.f. 7.1.1987 vide Ranchi University Memo dated 19.1.1996 (serial no. 43) and the petitioner got his own Ph. D. degree in 1983 and his result was published vide Ranchi University Memo dated 28.01.1983. It has further been averred that the petitioner in view of the aforesaid details of qualification, achievements and experience, covered by the statutory provisions for promotion and entitled for the same, applied for promotion to the post of University Professor w.e.f. 3.12.1991 under the aforesaid Scheme vide duly forwarded application dated 14.8.1997 with all relevant documents contained in 26 annexures and after due scrutiny and screening by the statutory screening committee of the Ranchi University, the petitioner''s application complete in all respects was recommended and forwarded to the Bihar State University Service Commission for promotion on 8.5.1999 in a lot of 12 similar cases of promotion of the teachers. It has further been averred that the Bihar State University Service Commission, Patna though recommended the names of eight teachers out of 12 for promotion from Reader to the post of University Professor under time bound promotion scheme on 16/25 years, but wanted notification for Ph.D. production registration under the guidance of the petitioner for consideration of petitioner''s promotion to the post of University Professor vide Commission''s letter dated 2.8.1989 which was communicated to the petitioner, though the same document-notification of Ph.D. registration under the guidance of the petitioner was already annexed with the application. After getting no response, the petitioner continued making representations for promotion to the Registrar, Ranchi University (respondent No. 2) and the Vice-Chancellor of Ranchi University (respondent No. 1) vide his applications dated 20.6.2006 and 17.07.2006 with request for correction of date of joining and removal of anomalies in the pay fixation of the petitioner, which fell on the deaf ears of the respondents. The petitioner left with no other alternative and efficacious remedy, has been compelled to knock the doors of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for redressal of his grievances. 4. The petitioner left with no other alternative and efficacious remedy, has been compelled to knock the doors of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for redressal of his grievances. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently submitted that even after re-organization of the State, the recommendation of the Bihar State University Service Commission have been coming in the State of Jharkhand and concerned teachers have been promoted to the post of Reader and University Professor under the time bound promotion Scheme, even the juniors have been promoted, but the case of the petitioner has been neglected, ignored and discriminated causing a huge loss in respect of cadre, rank, monetary benefits and prestige. Learned counsel further submits that when the case of the petitioner was found suitable and he being eligible and entitled for promotion to the post of University Professor w.e.f. 3.12.1991 and recommended to the Commission, it was the statutory duty of the respondents to pursue the matter of the petitioner''s promotion to its logical end. 5. A counter affidavit dated 05.07.2012 has been filed by the respondent no. 3 stating, therein, that presently the prayer of the petitioner as made in this case is lying in between the petitioner and the University and this respondent has nothing to do in the instant case at this stage. 6. A counter affidavit dated 21.07.2015 has been filed by the respondent-Kolhan University. In the said affidavit, it has been, inter alia, submitted that the Bihar State University (Constituent Colleges) Service Commission, Patna vide Annexures-11, granted concurrence for promotion from the post of Reader to the post of Professors to 8 persons (Readers) and by the same letter, Bihar State University (Constituent Colleges Service Commission, Patna, requested the Registrar, Ranchi University, Ranchi to send certain documents in respect to the petitioner and Others for consideration for grant of concurrence for promotion to the post of University Professor under time bound promotion scheme and thereafter certain documents were also sent by the Ranchi University to the Bihar State University (Constituent Colleges) Service Commission, Patna in August, 2000 and since then the matter is still pending before the Bihar State University (Constituent Colleges) Service Commission, Patna. It has been stated that no record pertaining to recommendation of the screening committee in respect of the petitioner is available with the Kolhan University and unless the relevant records pertaining to the petitioner is made available by the Ranchi University to the Kolhan University, the Kolhan University is not in a position to make any specific statement in this regard. After creation of the State of Jharkhand w.e.f. 15.11.2000, Bihar State University (Constituent Colleges) Services Commission, Patna has no jurisdiction at present in terms of Bihar Re-organization Act, 2000 to take any decision at this stage and hence, the present writ petition is not maintainable as against the respondent-Kolhan University. 7. A counter affidavit has been filed by the respondent no. 5, wherein, it has been, inter alia, stated that after the dissolution of the Bihar State University (Constituent College) Service Commission, as per the direction of the department and request made by the Ranchi University, Ranchi, all documents/files/records and applications related with different subjects of the teachers of Ranchi University, Ranchi has been sent to the Ranchi University, Ranchi through one Sri Vinay Kumar Verma, Assistant appointed by the Ranchi University, Ranchi, which is evident from the letter dated 20.07.2007 and letter dated 22.08.2007. Thereafter all the documents related with the teachers of Ranchi University, Ranchi has already been sent to the said University, hence, no documents are available here in connection with the teachers of the said University including the petitioner. 8. Mr. A. K. Mehta, learned counsel for the Respondent-Ranchi University submits that now all the relevant materials pertaining to the petitioner are available with the Workers College, Jamshedpur and if the College transmits all the relevant materials to the Ranchi University, then the Ranchi University will be in a position to do the needful at its end. 9. 8. Mr. A. K. Mehta, learned counsel for the Respondent-Ranchi University submits that now all the relevant materials pertaining to the petitioner are available with the Workers College, Jamshedpur and if the College transmits all the relevant materials to the Ranchi University, then the Ranchi University will be in a position to do the needful at its end. 9. After hearing the learned counsel of the respective parties and on perusal of the records with a view to do substantial justice, it would be apposite to dispose of this writ petition with a direction to the petitioner to submit all papers to the Worker''s College, Jamshedpur and thereafter, the Workers'' College, Jamshedpur will transmit all the relevant materials to the Kolhan University, who, in turn will forward it to the Ranchi University, so that the case of the petitioner can be considered by the Screening Committee, who shall forward the said papers to the Commission as per relevant provision of Statute of the University Act. The entire exercise shall be completed within a period of three months from the date of receipt/production of the copy of the order. 10. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the writ petition stands disposed of.