Patna High Court
Mr. Subodh KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- ALOK KUMAR SINHA
Holding
The Court directed that the petitioners may file a fresh representation before the Vice‑Chancellor, which must be decided within eight weeks, and any relief granted must be implemented within three months, without deciding the merits of regularisation.
Summary
The petitioners, five employees of Veer Kunwar Singh University, filed a writ seeking regularisation of their posts, salary parity under the principle of equal pay for equal work, and entitlement to Provident Fund benefits. They relied on recent Supreme Court judgments that favour regularisation of long‑serving employees performing regular duties. The university and the State of Bihar raised no objection to the petitioners' request to file a fresh representation before the Vice‑Chancellor. The Court, noting the limited nature of the prayer, granted liberty to the petitioners to submit such representation within two weeks and directed the Vice‑Chancellor to decide it within eight weeks, with any relief to be implemented within three months. No substantive order on regularisation or benefits was made; the writ application was disposed with the procedural direction.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioners are entitled to regularisation of their services, salary parity and Provident Fund benefits under the principle of equal pay for equal work.
- Whether the university is obligated to consider a fresh representation by the petitioners and decide it within a stipulated time frame.
- How the recent Supreme Court judgments on regularisation of long‑service employees apply to the present case.
Subjects
- regularisation
- equal pay for equal work
- provident fund
- public employment
- writ jurisdiction
- higher education
- service regularisation
- representation
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.4854 of 2026
======================================================
1. Mr. Subodh Kumar S/o Sri Chandrabhushan Prasad Srivastwa, R/o- Mahabir
Asthan, P.O. and P.S.- Sasaram and working as computer operator/Assistant
of Mahila College, Dalmianagar.
2. Mr. Anant Kumar, S/o- Late Kashi Nath Prasad, R/o- Mohalla- Fazalganj,
Ward No. 10, P.O. and P.S- Sasaram, District- Rohtas, and working as night
watchman at Sri Shankar College, Sasaram.
3. Suman Kumari, W/o- Shree Shankar Prasad Gupta, R/o- Village- Ahraon,
P.O.- Baraon Kala, District- Rohtas and working as computer operator/
Assistant at Sri Shankar College, Sasaram (Rohtas).
4. Mr. Anant Kumar, S/o Shree Vishwanath Singh, R/o Village- Kirhindi, P.O.-
Kirhindi, District- Rohtas and working as computer operator/ Assistant at
Rohtas Mahila College, Sasaram.
5. Chandan Sharma, S/o- Late Rajdeo Sharma, R/o- Village and P.O.- Agatha,
District- Rohtas and working as Night Watchman at Rohtas Mahila College,
Sasaram (Rohtas).
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Deptt. of Higher
Education, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.
2. Director (Higher Education), Deptt. of Higher Education, Govt. of Bihar,
Patna.
3. Veer Kunwar Singh University, Ara through its Registrar.
4. The Vice-Chancellor, Veer Kunwar Singh University, Ara.
5. Registrar, Veer Kunwar Singh University, Ara.
6. The Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, R. Block, Road No.6,
Serpentine Road, Patna- 800001.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Onkar Kumar, Adv.
Dr. Pramod Kumar Singh, Adv.
Mr. Akhouri Bipin Srivastava, Adv.
For the State : Mr. Ajay Behari Sinha, Sr. Adv., GA-8
Mr. Neeraj Raj, AC to GA-8
For Respondent No.3to5 : Mr. Rajesh Prasad Chaudhary, Adv.
Mr. Shyama Kant Singh, Adv.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR SINHA
ORAL ORDER
2 15-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned
Senior Counsel for respondent-State and learned counsel
Patna High Court CWJC No.4854 of 2026(2) dt.15-04-2026
2/5
appearing for Veer Kunwar Singh University, Ara.
2. With the consent of the parties, this writ application
is being disposed of at this stage itself.
3. The petitioners in the present writ application have
prayed for the grant of following reliefs:
“(i) To issue direction/order to the
respondents to regularize services of the
petitioners on their respective posts of
computer operator/Assistant and night
watchman/Peon in Veer Kunwar Singh
University, Ara from the date of their
respective initial appointments.
(ii) To ensure salary and other
allowance at par with regular employees
working and per forming same duties in the
University in view of principle known as
"Equal Pay for Equal Work".
(iii) To allow the benefits of
Provident Fund Scheme (E.P.F) as per law
to the petitioners from the date of their
respective appointments and update P.F
account by depositing contribution with 12%
interest.”
4. During the course of the argument, learned counsel
counsel for the petitioners submitted that the law relating to
regularization has subsequently evolved in the case of Jaggo
Vs. Union of India (2024 INSC 1034), Shripal & Anr. Vs.
Nagar Nigam, Ghaziabad (Civil Appeal No.8157-8179 of
2024), Dharam Singh & Ors. Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh &
Anr. (Civil Appeal No.8558 of 2018) and Bhola Nath Vs.
Patna High Court CWJC No.4854 of 2026(2) dt.15-04-2026
3/5
State of Jharkhand (2026 INSC 1999). All these judgments
have been recently delivered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court,
wherein as per the learned counsel for the petitioners, the
Hon’ble Supreme Court while not departing from the judgment
delivered by it in the case of Secretary, State of Karnataka Vs.
Uma Devi, has clarified that the said judgment cannot be
applied in a straight jacket manner in every case without taking
into account the ground realty.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits
that from the above enumerated judgments delivered by the
Hon’ble Supreme Court, what comes out is that where an
employee has been allowed to continue for a long period of
time, and the nature of work is not temporary or casual, but of a
regular and continuing nature, the situation would stand on a
different footing. He further submits that in such situation the
Apex Court has recognized that having taken the benefit of such
long service the employer cannot simply turn around and
denying any form of security and benefits.
6. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners,
therefore, submits that the petitioners may be permitted to file a
fresh representation before the Vice-chancellor, Veer Kunwar
Singh University, Ara (respondent no.4) in light of the above
Patna High Court CWJC No.4854 of 2026(2) dt.15-04-2026
4/5
enumerated judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court and an
appropriate direction be issued to the Vice-chancellor, Veer
Kunwar Singh University, Ara that if such a representation is
received from the petitioners, the same would be decided within
a fixed time frame, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the
petitioners. Learned counsel for the petitioners also prays that
while pressing the fresh representation which the petitioners
would be filing, the petitioners may be permitted to rely on
other judgments/judicial pronouncements which may help the
case of the petitioners.
7. Learned counsel appearing for respondent
University does not have any objection to the aforesaid
submission made by learned counsel appearing for the
petitioners. Even the learned Senior Counsel appearing for
respondent-State has no objection to the submission made by
learned counsel for appearing for the petitioners.
8. Considering the limited nature of prayer made by
learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, this writ
application is disposed of granting liberty to the petitioners to
file a fresh representation before the Vice-chancellor, Veer
Kunwar Singh University, Ara based on the above enumerated
judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court and other judgments
Patna High Court CWJC No.4854 of 2026(2) dt.15-04-2026
5/5
which the petitioners may choose to rely upon, within two
weeks from the date of this order. If such representations are
received from the petitioners, the same shall be disposed of
within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of the
representations.
9. Needless to emphasize that the final order which
shall be passed by the Vice-chancellor of the respondent
University should be a reasoned and speaking order. It is further
made clear that in case the petitioners are found entitled to the
relief, which the petitioners would be claiming through the
representations, the same should be extended to the petitioners
within a further period of three months from the date of passing
of the final order by the Vice-chancellor of the respondent
University.
10. With the aforesaid observation and direction and
liberty as granted, the present writ application stands disposed
of. Pending I.As, if any will be deemed to have been disposed
of.
(Alok Kumar Sinha, J)
Prakash Narayan
U
Checking your session…