JUDGMENT : Heard learned counsel for the parties through V.C. 2. The instant writ application has been preferred by the petitioner praying for a direction upon the respondent authorities to immediately sanction and release arrears of salary to the petitioner from January, 1991 to September, 1999, requisitions for which has already been forwarded by the respondent college but the arrears of salary for the said period has not yet been paid to him. 3. The case of the petitioner is that the respondent State vide its letter dated 30.10.1999 has granted approval to the appointment of the petitioner with effect from the date of his appointment i.e. 23.01.1991. When the petitioner was not paid his salary; the respondent-Principal vide letter dated 12.3.2011 wrote to the respondent-Director, Human Resource Development Department through proper channel for payment of arrear of salary of the petitioner for the period from January, 1991 to September, 1999. 4. Mr. Rahul Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner draws attention of this Court towards the letter dated 07.5.2007 whereby the Professor-in-Charge of respondent College has sent the statement of arrear claim amount for the relevant period of the petitioner to the Accounts Officer, Human Resource Development Department, Government of Jharkhand and even a reminder was given vide letter dated 12.3.2011. However, the respondent-University vide its letter dated 13.6.2011 wrote a letter to the respondent-college about furnishing the reason for belated submission of arrear of salary and also for furnishing of nonpayment certificate which was also supplied to the University. However, for the reasons best known to the respondent authorities; the petitioner has not been paid the long pending arrear of salary. Learned counsel further refers to the counter affidavit filed by the State wherein it has been stated at Paragraph-8 that the Department has already approved the pay scale of the petitioner in 5th UGC Scale vide letter No. 318 dated 03.05.2005; which clearly transpires that the department has given approval. 5. Mr. Rakesh Kr. Roy, learned counsel for the State, relying on the statement made in Paragraph-8 of the counter affidavit submits that now the State has got no role to play. Paragraph-8 of the statement made in the affidavit dated 19.2.2020 is quoted herein below: “8. 5. Mr. Rakesh Kr. Roy, learned counsel for the State, relying on the statement made in Paragraph-8 of the counter affidavit submits that now the State has got no role to play. Paragraph-8 of the statement made in the affidavit dated 19.2.2020 is quoted herein below: “8. That it is further relevant to mention that the Department has already approved the pay scale of the petitioner in 5th UGC Scale vide Letter No. 318 dated 03.05.2005 (Annexure-2 of the writ petition). It is also necessary to mention that the Department gives its approval on the proposal of pay fixation sent by the University and provides fund for payment. Now the University has to calculate the legally payable dues of the petitioner and accordingly pay the same.” 6. Mr. Vikash Kumar, learned counsel for the respondent College supported the averments made in the writ application. 7. Mr. Anoop Kumar Mehta, learned counsel for the respondent-University submits that the entire payment which is alleged to be due is for the period before bifurcation of the State and the writ application has been filed in the year 2014. He further submits that after creation of the State of Jharkhand; the petitioner is getting the pay scale of 5th Pay Revision. Though, it is the University which has to take a decision and pass an appropriate order for the period of arrear of salary from the year 1991 to 1999; but the respondent State should come with an order with regard to approval of payment of salary for the period involved in this case, which is certainly before the creation of Jharkhand. Mr. Anoop Kumar Mehta further contended that the moment any order will come from the State; the University will act accordingly, as without any sanction of fund; the petitioner cannot get any relief effectively. 8. In view of the aforesaid submission of the rival parties and after perusing several documents and averments made in the Paragraph 8 of the counter affidavit filed by the State it appears that the pay scale of the petitioner in 5th UGC Scale has already been sanctioned vide letter dated 03.5.2005 and the department gave its approval to the pay fixation sent by the University. In this background and also in view of the admitted facts that petitioner was duly appointed on sanctioned post on 23.01.1991 and even the College Service Commission has recommended the benefit from the very same date and vide letter under Memo No. 1866 dated 30.10.1999 (Annexure 1); the respondent State has granted approval to the appointment of the petitioner with effect from the date of his initial appointment i.e. 23.01.1991, this Court finds no reason why the petitioner is being deprived of his legitimate salary for the relevant period. As such, the instant writ application is, hereby, disposed of by directing the State respondent to pass an order with respect to payment of arrear of salary for the period from January, 1991 to September, 1999 and ask for claim from the respondent University within a period of ten weeks from the dated of receipt/production of copy of this order. Thereafter, the respondent University will make requisition for fund from the State Government after sending the claim to the State within a period of four weeks thereafter. Subsequently, after receiving the claim for payment of arrear of salary, the State respondent shall sanction and release the amount to be paid towards payment of arrears of salary to the respondent University within a period of six weeks thereafter. After the fund is sanctioned and received by the University; the University shall pay the arrear of salary within a period of two weeks thereafter. It is made clear that since the matter is very old; as such the time is an essence of this order and therefore every concerned office will act upon it. 9. With the aforesaid directions, the instant writ application is allowed and disposed of.