Research › Search › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

2025 DIGILAW 461 (PAT)

State of Bihar v. Ghanshyam Jha

2025-04-30

ASHUTOSH KUMAR, PARTHA SARTHY

body2025
Ashutosh Kumar, ACJ. – Both the appeals preferred on behalf of the State have been taken up together and are being disposed off by this common judgment. 2. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties. 3. Several of the teachers of private degree colleges had come before this Court vide different writ petitions seeking a direction to the State to release funds to the University, which could be utilized for paying their salaries. 4. In almost all the writ petitions, positive orders were passed, but to no avail. 5. A learned Single Judge, hearing the writ petitions, later found that an amendment has been brought about in the year 2015 in the Bihar Universities Act, 1976 (in short the Act of 1976), modifying Section 57-A of the Act and adding sub-Section 6, which reads as follows: – “The Selection Committee, subject to this Act, will complete the scrutiny of the cases of the teachers of the affiliated degree colleges appointed prior to 19.04.2007, without the recommendation of the Bihar College Service Commission on the basis of qualifications in force at the time of appointment of such teachers up to 31.03.2017, otherwise, such appointments will not be treated valid. Thereafter, the Governing Body of the college will accept the names recommended by the Selection Committee, which shall be finally approved by the concerned University. Distribution of the amount of grant of the State Government will be made across the teachers in the concerned affiliated degree colleges by its Governing Body up to 31.03.2017.” 6. The time limit was further extended to 31.03.2018. 7. It was further found out by the learned Single Judge that most of the petitioners had been appointed in private colleges based on the recommendations of the Governing Body of such colleges. All such colleges were affiliated with the respective Universities. However, their appointments did not have the sanction/approval of the Bihar College Service Commission. 8. With the Bihar College Service Commission having been dissolved, a new body, viz., Selection Committee at the College Level was introduced for making recommendations with regard to appointment of teachers of the affiliated degree colleges under the Act of 1976, as amended from time to time. 9. Most of the writ petitioners were being paid their salaries till 2012 on the basis of deficit grant as also grant against performance of the students of the college in the academic year. 9. Most of the writ petitioners were being paid their salaries till 2012 on the basis of deficit grant as also grant against performance of the students of the college in the academic year. 10. There were many colleges having teachers and non-teaching staff, which were not being funded by the State. It was only later in the day that the education policy, especially with respect to the grant of finances to the colleges underwent a paradigm shift in the State of Bihar and the Government decided to make available grants to all colleges, especially for the purposes of payment of salaries to the teachers and staff. 11. However, to implement that, it required to be ascertained as to which of the teachers were appointed on the recommendation of the Governing Body and were allowed to continue to teach in such colleges later, but without the approval of the Bihar College Service Commission. 12. Be it noted that the initial appointment of such teachers in private colleges were made with a condition that such appointment would be valid only for six months and any further extension of the service of such teachers would be based on the recommendation of the Bihar College Service Commission. 13. This provision was completely ignored for a good number of years. It was later found that there were many teachers whose appointments were not confirmed by the Bihar College Service Commission. The Government also took into account that so many private institutions had come up only for the reason that the Government had stopped opening colleges. These colleges were started by the efforts of private persons and at the time when the policy of the State of Bihar was undergoing change, these colleges had infrastructure, teachers and teaching staff. In this context, it was understood by the Government that it would only be easier for the State to carry out the new education policy specially with respect to grant of finances, by using the infrastructure and the faculty of such colleges which were existing. It was for this reason that it was resolved that instead of Bihar College Service Commission, a new body, called Selection Committee at College Level, would be and was introduced for completing the work of Bihar College Service Commission, viz., providing recommendation with respect to appointment of teachers of the affiliated degree colleges under the Act of 1976. 14. It was for this reason that it was resolved that instead of Bihar College Service Commission, a new body, called Selection Committee at College Level, would be and was introduced for completing the work of Bihar College Service Commission, viz., providing recommendation with respect to appointment of teachers of the affiliated degree colleges under the Act of 1976. 14. Most of the Selection Committee at College Level carried out the process of scrutinizing the cases of teachers and submitted a report to the Governing Body, which had to be accepted by such Governing Bodies. The Governing Bodies, in turn, had to send requisition to the State for the release of grant. This was the process which was evolved for carrying out the policy of giving grant to the private degree colleges affiliated to the Universities. 15. It was only much later, while the writ petitions were being decided, that a counter affidavit having been sworn by the Director of Education was filed which inter alia declared that the amendment in 2015 in Section 57-A of the Act of 1976 was only limited for such institutions/colleges which were getting grant from the Government against the performance of the students in an academic year. This interpretation was obviously for withholding grant to other degree colleges, which hitherto had been receiving the deficit grant for a long time. 16. The learned Single Judge, on a perusal of the preamble of the Amending Act of 2015, referred to above, found that though the introduction talked about Resolution No. 1846 dated 21.11.2008, which primarily dealt with such institutions which were getting grant against performance of students, but the amendment was brought about only on the assessment of the State that many of the teachers working in private degree colleges for long duration, who were appointed by the Governing Body of such colleges, were not being paid only for the reason that their services were not confirmed by the Bihar College Service Commission. 17. However, since the Commission had been dissolved, the defect could not have been remedied and, therefore, it was decided to have an another body called Selection Committee at College Level, about which reference had been made earlier. 18. 17. However, since the Commission had been dissolved, the defect could not have been remedied and, therefore, it was decided to have an another body called Selection Committee at College Level, about which reference had been made earlier. 18. The last part of the amendment, viz., the introduction of sub-Clause 6 in Section 57-A of the Act of 1976, clearly demonstrates that such change in the policy of the Government was with respect to teachers of private degree colleges affiliated to Universities across the board. Some were not getting grant from the Government and some others were getting deficit grant or grant against performance. 19. Since by the amendment in sub-Clause 6 of Section 57-A of the Act of 1976, it was declared that the distribution of the amount of grants sanctioned by the State Government will be made amongst the teachers of the concerned affiliated degree colleges by its Governing Body up to 31.03.2017, which was later extended till 31.03.2018, the learned Single Judge categorically held, and in our opinion, rightly so, that for grant of finances, the distinction between colleges getting deficit grant and colleges getting grant against performance was absolutely unwarranted and uncalled for. This distinction only reflected the blinkered approach of the Department. 20. Thus, the teachers of all the affiliated degree colleges appointed prior to 19.04.2007 were covered by the Amending Act of 2015 and the distinction which was carved out by the State of limiting this benefit only for teachers of such degree colleges which were getting grant against performance of the students in such colleges, is not only illusory but iniquitous. 21. The State, thus, and as held by the learned Single Judge would be under an obligation to release the grant to the concerned Universities for further distribution of salary and other allowances to the writ petitioners. It was also clarified by the impugned judgment that those teachers who had retired shall also be granted their due pensionary benefits in terms of the U.G.C. pay scale. This exercise was to be conducted positively within a period of one month. 22. We endorse the same but considering the gigantic exercise which would be required to be executed, we are of the view that the time of one month for completing the entire exercise would be too short. 23. This exercise was to be conducted positively within a period of one month. 22. We endorse the same but considering the gigantic exercise which would be required to be executed, we are of the view that the time of one month for completing the entire exercise would be too short. 23. We, therefore, modify the judgment to the extent that the entire exercise shall be conducted and concluded within a period of three months from the date of passing of this order. 24. With the afore-noted modification in the judgment impugned in the present set of appeals, both the appeals stand disposed off accordingly. 25. Interlocutory application/s, if any, also stand disposed off accordingly.