JUDGMENT : The present writ petition has been filed for issuance of direction upon the concerned respondents to pay admissible retiral benefits to the petitioner w.e.f. 01.04.2021 including pension, gratuity, leave encashment, group insurance etc. with interest @ 12% per annum for delayed payment from 01.04.2021 till the same is paid. 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the content of the writ petition. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in pursuance of letter no. B/8189 dated 05.12.1986 issued by the Registrar, Ranchi University, Ranchi, the petitioner was appointed as Steno-Typist (Grade-III) in S.S. Memorial College, Ranchi- a constituent unit of Ranchi University, Ranchi. The petitioner thereafter joined on the post of Steno-Typist in the said college on 08.12.1986. An advertisement was published in daily newspaper- ‘Ranchi Express’ on 13.01.1989 inviting applications for teaching and non-teaching posts including Steno-Typist in Academic Staff College, Ranchi University, Ranchi. Pursuant to the said advertisement, the petitioner applied for the post of Steno-Typist and on following due process, he was selected for the said post and notification as contained in memo no. Esstt./272-75 dated 27.02.1989 was issued to that effect. Thereafter, the petitioner was relieved from S.S. Memorial College, Ranchi on 27.02.1989 and he joined the post of Steno-Typist in Academic Staff College, Ranchi University, Ranchi on the same day in afternoon. The name of the petitioner was subsequently changed from ‘Suresh Raut’ to ‘Suresh Prasad Roy’ as would be evident from notification no. UGC-ASC/RU/14694-98/2K6 dated 02.01.2006 issued by the office of the Director, Academic Staff College, Ranchi University, Ranchi. The post of Steno-Typist held by the petitioner was re-designated as Assistant (Senior) w.e.f. 31.05.2006. 4. It is further submitted that the appointment letter issued in favour of the petitioner would itself make it clear that his appointment was on the same terms and conditions of service as admissible to the employees of Ranchi University. Nonetheless, the University Grant Commission (UGC), New Delhi, vide letter no.- D.O.No.F.28-42/2012 (ASC) dated 18.02.2013 issued to the Registrar, Ranchi University, Ranchi informed that similar status was to be provided to the employees of Academic Staff College as that of regular employees of Ranchi University. The petitioner after rendering service for more than 35 years superannuated on 31.03.2021. Thereafter, he duly submitted his application for grant of pension, gratuity, leave encashment etc. through proper channel, but the admissible amount was not paid to him. The petitioner after rendering service for more than 35 years superannuated on 31.03.2021. Thereafter, he duly submitted his application for grant of pension, gratuity, leave encashment etc. through proper channel, but the admissible amount was not paid to him. He also filed representations before the respondent-UGC as well as Ranchi University, however the same were not responded which compelled him to prefer the present writ petition. 5. A counter affidavit on behalf of the respondent nos. 2 and 3 has been filed wherein it has been averred that the petitioner was first appointed on daily wages basis as Steno-Typist (Grade-III) in S.S. Memorial College, Ranchi in pursuance of letter no. B/8189 dated 05.12.1986 issued by the Registrar, Ranchi University, Ranchi and he joined the said post on 08.12.1986. Subsequent to the advertisement issued by the Academic Staff College, Ranchi University, Ranchi, the petitioner was appointed afresh as a Steno-Typist in the said college vide memo no. Esstt./272-75 dated 27.02.1989. Thereafter, he was relieved by S.S.Memorial College, Ranchi to join his new post at Academic Staff College, Ranchi University, Ranchi,. 6. It has also been stated in the said counter affidavit that after joining the Academic Staff College, Ranchi University, Ranchi, the petitioner has never been paid salary and other emoluments from the fund of Ranchi University. Moreover, no deduction has been made by the Ranchi University from his salary on account of Provident Fund, Group Insurance, Employees’ Welfare Fund etc. at any stage. In fact, the salary of the petitioner has been paid by the Academic Staff College, Ranchi University, Ranchi, from the fund allocated by the UGC as Academic Staff College, Ranchi University, Ranchi, is an entity created and managed by the UGC. No demand has ever been made by Ranchi University from the State Government for making payment of the petitioner’s salary. He after joining Academic Staff College on independent basis has not been an employee of Ranchi University, thus it is not liable for making any payment to the petitioner. 7. Another counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondent no. 4 stating inter alia that as per guidelines for Academic Staff Colleges of UGC, financial assistance to the Academic Staff Colleges is given by the UGC, however the respondent nos. 7. Another counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondent no. 4 stating inter alia that as per guidelines for Academic Staff Colleges of UGC, financial assistance to the Academic Staff Colleges is given by the UGC, however the respondent nos. 1 to 3 have to decide the claim of the petitioner as the appointment letter was issued to him on same terms and conditions of service as admissible to the employees of Ranchi University. The said fact was informed by the UGC vide letter no. F.28-42/2012(ASC) dated 18.02.2013 for grating similar status to the employees of the Academic Staff College as that of the employees of the Ranchi University. The respondent no. 4 in its counter affidavit has admitted the fact that the post of Steno-Typist was re-designated as Assistant (Senior) vide notification no. UGC-ASC/RU/14694-98/2K6 dated 02.01.2006 issued by the office of the Director, Academic Staff College, Ranchi University, Ranchi. 8. It emerges from the stands taken in the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondent nos. 2 and 3 as well as the respondent no. 4 that the employees of Academic Staff College, Ranchi University, Ranchi have been granted similar status as that of the employees of the Ranchi University. It is also not in dispute that the petitioner was appointed on the post of Steno-Typist in Academic Staff College, Ranchi University, Ranchi in the year 1989 following due procedure so as to meet the requirement as explained by the UGC in its letter no.- D.O.No.F.28-42/2012 (ASC) dated 18.02.2013. 9. It thus appears from the stand taken by the respondent no. 4 in its counter affidavit that the respondent nos. 2 and 3 have to first decide the petitioner’s admissible claim as he was appointed on the same terms and conditions of service admissible to the employees of Ranchi University whereas the stand of the respondent nos. 2 and 3 taken in their counter affidavit is that the payment of salary and other emoluments have not been paid to the petitioner from the fund of Ranchi University. However, there is no dispute on the said issue as the respondent no. 4 has admitted in its counter affidavit that the payment of salary to the employees of the Academic Staff College, Ranchi University, Ranchi, is made from the fund allocated by the UGC. However, there is no dispute on the said issue as the respondent no. 4 has admitted in its counter affidavit that the payment of salary to the employees of the Academic Staff College, Ranchi University, Ranchi, is made from the fund allocated by the UGC. In fact, the stand of the respondent no 4 is that since the petitioner was appointed in Academic Staff College on the same terms and conditions as applicable to the staff of Ranchi University, the concerned authority of the said University has to first take decision on the admissibility of post-retiral dues to the petitioner so that an appropriate fund can be released by the UGC. 10. The Court takes notices of the factual stand taken by the respondent nos. 2 and 3 in their counter affidavit to the extent that no deduction was made from the petitioner’s salary on account of Provident Fund, Group Insurance, Employees’ Welfare Fund etc. at any stage. It has however not been clarified as to whether the petitioner is entitled for pension, gratuity, leave encashment and other admissible dues. 11. Under the said circumstance, the respondent no. 3 is directed to take a decision within four weeks with regard to admissibility of the petitioner’s post-retiral claims particularly for payment of pension, gratuity, leave encashment etc. If it is found that the petitioner is entitled for payment of such retiral dues, the same shall be calculated under different heads and be communicated to the respondent no. 4 which, in turn, shall release the required fund for the purpose of making effective payment to the petitioner within four week thereafter. On release of the fund, the respondent no. 3 shall make effective payment of the same to the petitioner within further two weeks. 12. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of with aforesaid direction.