Patna High Court
Ram Suresh DubeyversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- AJIT KUMAR
Holding
The court set aside the impugned order and directed the university to consider the petitioner's claim for absorption as Laboratory‑in‑Charge of Physics.
Summary
The petitioner, Ram Suresh Dubey, sought a writ directing the quashing of a letter dated 24 July 2016 that regularised another employee and denied his own claim for absorption as Laboratory‑in‑Charge of Physics, invoking a Supreme Court‑affirmed Justice S.B. Sinha commission order. He argued that his appointment as Lab Technician in Physics dated 26 June 1985 and subsequent salary payments established his entitlement, and that the university had earlier issued notifications under Section 4(1)(14) of the Bihar State Universities Act, 1976 for absorbing non‑teaching staff. The university contended that seniority considerations had led to other employees being absorbed and that his claim was not on the committee list. The court examined the appointment letters, salary records, and the university’s notifications, finding that the petitioner’s claim had not been properly considered and that the impugned order was perverse. Consequently, the court set aside the order, directing the Vice‑Chancellor of Patliputra University to consider the petitioner’s case and issue a final order within the stipulated time.
Issues considered
- Whether the order dated 24 July 2016 regularising respondent No.8 and rejecting the petitioner's claim is legally valid.
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to absorption/regularisation as per the Justice S.B. Sinha commission order affirmed by the Supreme Court.
- Whether the university complied with Section 4(1)(14) of the Bihar State Universities Act, 1976 in absorbing non‑teaching employees.
- Whether the petitioner's seniority and appointment entitle him to the relief sought.
Legislation cited
- Bihar State Universities Act, 1976 — s. 4(1)(14)
Subjects
- writ petition
- regularisation
- absorption
- seniority
- Bihar State Universities Act
- non‑teaching staff
- university employees
- Supreme Court judgment
- inter se seniority
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.10051 of 2019
======================================================
Ram Suresh Dubey Son of Late Nathuni Dubey 668, New Mainpura, P.O.-
Danapur Cantt. Danapur, District-Patna.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through Principal Secretary, Education Department,
Bihar, Patna.
2. The Director, Higher Education, Patna.
3. Magadh Univeristy, Bodh gaya through its Registrar.
4. The Vice-Chancellor, Magadh Univerisity, Bodh-Gaya.
5. The Registrar, Magadh Univeristy, Bodh Gaya
6. Pataliputra University, Patna through Registrar
7. The Vice-Chancellor, Pataliputra University, Patna.
8. Syed Mohammad Sagir, father name not Known Laborattory-in-Charge of
Chemistry, Shri Guru Govind Singh College, District-Patna.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Sunil Kumar Singh
For Magadh University : Mr.Sunil Kumar
For the State : Mr.Abhanjali
For the Respondent No.8 : Mr.Amrendra Kr. Sinha, No. 1
Mr.Shailendra Kr. Singh
For Patliputra University : Dr. Anand Kumar
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT KUMAR
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 05-01-2026
In the instant petition, petitioner has prayed for the
following relief(s):-
“That this is an application for
issuance of appropriate writs/directions for
quashing the part of letter dated 24.7.2016
(Annexure-9) whereby and whereunder
Patna High Court CWJC No.10051 of 2019 dt.05-01-2026
2/9
respondent no. 8 has been
absorbed/regularized as Laboratory-in-
Charge in Shri Guru Govind Singh College,
Patna City in place of petitioner. The
petitioner further prays to consider and
absorb/regularize petitioner on the post of
Laboratory-in-Charge of Physics w.e.f.
26.6.1985 in Shri Guru Govind Singh
College, Patna City on the basis of order of
Justice S.B.Sinha (Retd.) commission
affirmed by Hon’ble Supreme Court as
Juniors to petitioner have been absorbed and
also grant any other reliefs for which
petitioner is found entitled in the facts and
circumstances of the case.”
2. Counsel for the petitioner by referring to Annexure-1
submits that his appointment was made on the post of Lab
Technician in the Department of Physics on permanent basis in the
prescribed pay-scale with effect from 26.06.1985, the
recommendations of his continuance and being in service finds
place in the letter dated 12.02.1990 issued by the Human Resource
Department signature of Additional Secretary to the Government
as contained in Letter No. 25/C dated 12.02.1990.
3. It has next been submitted that pursuant to the order
passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Civil Appeal No. 6093 of
1997 and in the light of the report of the Hon’ble Justice Agarwal
Commission, the Vice Chancellor, Magadh University, Bodh Gaya
has been pleased to absorb the services of non-teaching employees
of IVth phase constituent colleges of the said university in exercise
Patna High Court CWJC No.10051 of 2019 dt.05-01-2026
3/9
of power conferred under Section 4(1)(14) of Bihar State
Universities Act, 1976 as amended up to date, with the approval of
the Syndicate of Magadh University on the post and college noted
against their name, and notification to this effect is said to have
been issued by the Registrar, Magadh University, Bodh Gaya,
which goes to show that the Vice Chancellor had issued an order
with regard to absorption of non-teaching employees, whose
names finds place in the list forming part of the notification issued
under the signature of Registrar, Magadh University, Bodh Gaya
dated 08.05.2005, whereby the services of other non-teaching
employees including this petitioner, namely, Ram Suresh Dubey,
were directed to be absorbed.
4. It has next been submitted that vide Annexure-6
which is contained in Memo No. 116 dated 04.04.2009, the
University has came out with specific notification issued in respect
of individual employees absorbing their services, which reads as
under:-
ex/k fo”ofo|ky;] cks/kx;k
vf/klwpuk
ekuuh; mPpre U;k;ky; ds }kjk flfoy vihy la[;k 6098@97 esa ikfjr
U;k;kns”kksa ds vuqikyu gsrq vUryhZuhdj.k lfefr dh vuq”kalk ,oa vfHk’kn~ ds
fu.kZ;ksijkUr f”k{kdsRrj deZpkfj;ksa dh lsok vUryhZuhdj.k ls lEcfU/kr iwoZ fuxZr
i=kad V.C./Res/170/05 fnukad 08&05&2005 esa vkaf”kd la”kks/ku djrs gq,
Jh@Jherh jke lqjs”k nqcs dks ySc bapktZ HkkSfrdh foHkkx ds Lohd`r@vuq”kaflr in
ij frfFk 26&06&85 ls ,l0th0th0,l0 egkfo|ky;] iVuk lhVh esa fcgkj jkT;
fo”ofo|ky; vf/kfu;e 1976 ¼v/kkof/k la”kksf/kr½ dh /kkjk 4¼1½ ¼14½ ds izko/kku ds
rgr tkWpksijkUr lsok esa vUryhZu fd;k tkrk gSA f”k{kdsRrj deZpkfj;ksa dh
Patna High Court CWJC No.10051 of 2019 dt.05-01-2026
4/9
ikjLifjd ojh;rk (Inter-Se-Seniority) ds fu/kkZj.k ls lEcfU/kr fu.kZ; ckn esa
fy;k tk;sxkA vUryhZuhdj.k ds QyLo:i ns; cdk;s jkf”k dk Hkqxrku jkT;
ljdkj ds nkf;Ro ds Hkqxrku ds fy, vuqnku izkIr gksus ds ckn gh fd;k tk;sxkA
ekuuh; dqyifr ds vkns”kkuqlkj
g0@&
dqylfpo
ex/k fo”ofo|ky;] cks/kx;k
fnukad % 04-04-09
Kkikad % G.S.I-D/ 116/ 50/09
izfrfyfi lwpukFkZ ,oa vko”;d dk;ZokbZ gsrq iszf’kr %&
1- lacaf/kr O;fDr
2- laacaf/kr iz/kkukpk;Z]
3- jkT;iky ds iz/kku lfpo] jktHkou iVukA
4- vk;qDr&lg&lfpo] ekuo lalk/ku fodkl foHkkx ¼mPp f”k{kk½] fcgkj ljdkj
iVukA
5- funs”kd mPp f”k{kk foHkkx] fcgkj ljdkj iVukA
5. Taking note of inter se seniority of all non-teaching
employees and their absorption having been directed by issuing
individual orders, which is appended with Annexure-6 of the writ
petition, counsel for the petitioner fairly submits that during
interregnum period, after bifurcation of Magadh University and
carving out of new University known as Patliputra University, the
petitioner’s services were transferred to the said university, from
where he got retired, and the affidavit which is said to have been
filed on behalf of the Patliputra University, the petitioner by
referring to the statement made in Para 7 submits that Principal of
Sri Guru Govind Singh College, Patna City has sent a Letter No.
GSC/1011/19 dated 24.09.2019 to the Registrar of Patliputra
University that the petitioner has been appointed as a Lab
Patna High Court CWJC No.10051 of 2019 dt.05-01-2026
5/9
Technician (Physics) on 26.06.1985, and has been made first
payment in the March, 1991 till April, 2008. This fact has not been
disputed, rather finds support from the statement made in Para-9 of
the counter affidavit. The Letter dated 24.07.2016 has been issued
by Magadh University, as has been referred in the counter affidavit
of Patliputra University, which shows that unless Magadh
University provides the absorption letter in respect of the
petitioner to Patliputra University, only then PVC could be done
by answering respondents and payment could be made.
6. Counsel for the petitioner by referring to the
statement made in Para 8 of the counter affidavit submits that the
Magadh University vide Letter No. 18 dated 24.04.2017 has
informed about the petitioner, the committee headed by Justice
S.B.Sinha has not found the name of this petitioner in the
committee list. However, his name finds place in the government
notification and also in the university notification dated
08.05.2005.
7. At this stage, counsel representing Magadh University
submits that merely on the basis of the fact that payment of salary
was started from March, 1991. The case of the petitioner was not
considered because the persons, who were senior to him, their
cases were considered for absorption. However, the submission
Patna High Court CWJC No.10051 of 2019 dt.05-01-2026
6/9
made by the counsel representing Magadh University is confronted
by the counsel for the petitioner by submitting that the
appointment of this petitioner is not in dispute, which is apparent
from the affidavit, of the Magadh University, wherein the
reference of his appointment is made in the said document and as
also the absorption letter dated 08.05.2005 also the notification
contained in Memo No. 116 dated 04.04.2009.
8. Counsel for the Respondent No. 8 has appeared,
pursuant to the notice issued by this Court submits that since my
appointment was made as against post of Lab Technician in
Chemistry while the petitioner’s appointment was made against
Lab Technician in Physics subject, there is no conflict between his
appointment and the appointment of Respondent No. 8, therefore,
the case of this petitioner is in no way affected by the appointment
or regularization/absorption having been made in view of his
entitlement, which is said to have been adjudicated by the
Commission, so constituted and consequential order so passed in
this case.
9. Counsel for the petitioner in rejoinder submits that
since the entitlement of this petitioner has not been adjudicated by
referring to the documents, which are available on record and by
mis-interpretating the various documents and as also, by ignoring
Patna High Court CWJC No.10051 of 2019 dt.05-01-2026
7/9
the decision taken by the Syndicate in the light of the orders
passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court, the order which is said to have
been passed for adjudicating the claim of this petitioner, deserves
to be interfered for doing complete notice. Therefore, the claim of
this petitioner may be directed to be considered on its own merit.
10. Accordingly, taking into consideration, the
submission of the parties and as also finding the documents in
relation to the claim of this petitioner falling in his favour insofar
as his appointment as also payment of salaries having been made
from the date of his initial appointment till 2008 it is required the
claim of this petitioner be adjudicated by referring to the materials
which is indicated hereinabove, in accordance with law.
11. From perusal of the report submitted by the
S.B.Sinha Committee, it appears that there is no consideration of
such factual position, while making adjudication by the one man
committee insofar the claim of this petitioner is concerned. Simply
by referring to the factual position and relying upon the said
report, it seems that the Vice-Chancellor vide order dated
24.07.2016 has passed the impugned order, which is appended
with the writ petition as Annexure-9, wherein it has been said that
the matter related to this petitioner was considered by the
Patna High Court CWJC No.10051 of 2019 dt.05-01-2026
8/9
S.B.Sinha’s committee and his name was not been found
appropriate for consideration.
12. Despite the fact that there was an appointment letter
issued in his favour and as also the name of this petitioner finds
place in the Government notification dated 12.02.2019 findings so
arrived by the Magadh University, Bodh Gaya appears to be
perversed and is fit to be rejected. Accordingly, insofar the claim
of this petitioner which is said to have been adjudicated in
pursuant to the order of Hon’ble Justice S.B.Sinha Committee
dated 11.05.2016, is hereby set aside, and accordingly, Vice-
Chancellor of Patliputra University is directed to consider the case
of this petitioner in the light of Annexure-1 and Annexure-2 as also
stand taken by the University in its counter affidavit filed on
13.11.2019, wherein the appointment letter issued in favour of the
petitioner has been concurred by the Principal of the Guru Govind
Singh College, Patna and also by referring to the records available
with the University, on submission of detailed representation
annexing all relevant documents including order passed by the
Court within a period of four weeks’ and on submission of such
representation, a final order shall be passed within a period of six
weeks’ thereafter, and necessary order so passed shall be
communicated to the petitioner within the same time, with all
Patna High Court CWJC No.10051 of 2019 dt.05-01-2026
9/9
consequential benefits for which the petitioner is found entitled in
law.
13. The instant writ petition stands disposed of.
(Ajit Kumar, J)
abhishekkr/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 16.01.2026
Transmission Date NA
Checking your session…