Patna High Court
Rajeev KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- ALOK KUMAR SINHA
Holding
The writ application is disposed by granting the petitioner liberty to file a representation before the Vice‑Chancellor, with prescribed timelines, without ordering immediate regularisation.
Summary
The petitioner, Rajeev Kumar, a contractual assistant at Langat Singh College, claimed that he was appointed in 2014 to a sanctioned post but was never regularised, while similarly situated employees were. He sought mandamus directing the university to regularise his service, grant back wages, and apply the "same work same pay" principle. The petitioner relied on several recent Supreme Court judgments concerning regularisation of contractual staff. The university had no objection to the limited prayer of being allowed to file a representation before the Vice‑Chancellor. The High Court disposed of the writ by granting the petitioner liberty to file such a representation within one month and directing the university to decide it within three months, without ordering immediate regularisation. The court emphasized that any final order must be reasoned and, if favorable, implemented within a month.
Issues considered
- What relief, if any, is appropriate for a contractual employee seeking regularisation and back wages under the "same work same pay" principle?
- Whether the court should direct the university to regularise the petitioner’s service or merely allow a representation before the Vice‑Chancellor.
Subjects
- contractual employee regularisation
- same work same pay
- mandamus
- representation before Vice Chancellor
- higher education employment
- public service law
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.8759 of 2025
======================================================
Rajeev Kumar Son of Jagannath Singh, resident of Bindh Niwas, Singahi
Colony, Bibiganj, Bhagwanpur, P.S. Muzaffarpur Sadar, District- Muzaffarpur
presently working as Assistant (third grade employee) on daily
wages/contractual basis in Langat Singh College, Muzaffarpur, District -
Muzaffarpur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Additional Chief Secretary, Education Department, Government of
Bihar, Patna.
3. The Director Higher Education, Education Department, Government of
Bihar, Patna.
4. Baba Saheb Bhim Rao Ambedkar Bihar University, Muzaffarpur through the
Registrar.
5. The Vice Chancellor, Baba Saheb Bhim Rao Ambedkar Bihar University,
Muzaffarpur.
6. The Registrar, Baba Saheb Bhim Rao Ambedkar Bihar University,
Muzaffarpur.
7. The Finance Officer, Baba Saheb Bhim Rao Ambedkar Bihar University,
Muzaffarpur.
8. The Principal, Langat Singh College, Muzaffarpur, District - Muzaffarpur.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Vijay Kumar Singh, Adv.
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Standing Counsel 23
Mr. Madhusudan Rai, AC to SC-23
For BRA Bihar University : Mr. Viveka Nand Singh, Adv.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR SINHA
ORAL ORDER
3 27-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
counsel appearing for respondent Baba Saheb Bhim Rao
Ambedkar Bihar University.
2. With the consent of both the parties, this writ
application is being disposed of at this stage itself.
3. In the present writ application, the petitioner has
Patna High Court CWJC No.8759 of 2025(3) dt.27-04-2026
2/4
prayed for the grant of following reliefs:
“(I) For issuance of an
appropriate writ in the nature of
MANDAMUS,commanding and directing the
Respondent Authorities to regularize the
services of the petitioners as 3rd Grade
employee (Assistant) in Langat Singh
College, Muzaffarpur (hereinafter referred
to as the College) on the ground that the
petitioner was appointed after following the
due process of selection as third grade
employees (Assistant) against the sanctioned
and vacant post in the year 2014 but on
contractual/ daily wages basis and he is
working as such since last several years
continuously as also the services of similarly
situated persons have already been
regularized by the Respondent University
ignoring the better claim of the petitioner.
(II) For issuance of an
appropriate writ in the nature of
MANDAMUS commanding and directing the
Respondent University to grant
consequential benefit of service counting the
services of the petitioner from the date of his
initial appointment.
(III) For issuance of an
appropriate writ in the nature of
MANDAMUS commanding and directing the
Respondent University to allow the salary
for "same work same pay" and pay monthly
salary of Rs.26,069/- per month to the
petitioner, who is working against 3rd Grade
post on the basis of minimum basic pay of
7th pay-scale with admissible pursuant to
the D.A. with effect from 10.03.2022 office
order contained in memo no.B/1222 dated
18.07.2022 issued under the signature of the
Respondent no.6.
(IV) For issuance of any other
appropriate writ / writs, order orders
direction / directions for which the writ
petitioner would be entitled under the facts
Patna High Court CWJC No.8759 of 2025(3) dt.27-04-2026
3/4
and circumstances of the case.”
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
case of the petitioner is squarely covered by the recent decisions
of the Hon’ble Supreme Court delivered in the case of Vinod
Kumar & Ors. Etc. Vs. Union of India & Ors. reported in
(2024) 1 S.C.R. 1230, Jaggo Vs. Union of India & Ors. [SLP
(C) No. 5580 of 2024], Shripal & Anr. Vs. Nagar Nigam,
Ghaziabad (Civil Appeal Nos. 8158-8179 of 2024) and
Dharam Singh & Ors. Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Anr.
[Civil Appeal No(S). 8558 of 2018].
5. He, therefore, submits that for claiming the
aforesaid relief the petitioner be allowed to file a representation
before the Vice-Chancellor of the respondent University relying
upon the above enumerated Supreme Court judgments and
further prays that if such a representation is filed, the Vice-
Chancellor of the respondent University be directed to dispose
of the same within a fixed time frame after giving an
opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.
6. To the aforesaid prayer being made by learned
counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel appearing for the
respondent University does not have any objection.
7. Considering the limited nature of prayer being
made by learned counsel for the petitioner, this writ application
Patna High Court CWJC No.8759 of 2025(3) dt.27-04-2026
4/4
is disposed of granting liberty to the petitioner to file a
representation before the Vice-Chancellor of the respondent
University within one month from today, relying upon the above
enumerated judgments of the Supreme Court and if such a
representation is filed within the stipulated time the same shall
be heard and disposed of within a further period of three months
from the date of receipt of the representation by the petitioner.
8. Needless to emphasize that the final order which
shall be passed by the respondent University should be a
reasoned and speaking order and in case the petitioner is found
entitled to the relief, which the petitioner would be claiming
through the representation, the same should be extended to the
petitioner within a period of one month from the date of passing
of the final order by the Vice-chancellor of the respondent
University.
9. With the aforesaid observation, direction and
liberty granted, the present writ application stands disposed off.
All pending interlocutory application(s), if any, shall also be
deemed to have been disposed of.
(Alok Kumar Sinha, J)
Prakash Narayan
U
Checking your session…