The Court dismissed an appeal by a retired Reader seeking advancement of his promotion date from 1990 to 1986. Relying on delay, laches, and constructive res judicata, the Court held the claim was stale. The single Judge's order was upheld and the appeal rejected.
Appeal dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Letters Patent Appeal No.289 of 2011 In
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 5032 of 2010
====================================================== Arbind Kumar Jha S/O Late Boua Jha, resident of village -Raushi, P.O.Narendrapur, P.S.-Mahadeo Math, Madhubani.
.... .... Appellant Versus 1. The Lalit Narayan Mithila University, through Respondent No. 2 Darbhanga. 2. The Vice Chancellor, Lalit Narayan Mithila University, Darbhanga 3. The Registrar, Lalit Narayan Mithila University, Darbhanga 4. The Finance Officer, Lalit Narayan Mithila University, Darbhanga 5. The Principal, R.K. College, Madhubani.
.... .... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant : Mr. Ashok Kumar Prasad, Mr. Prabhas Ranjan, Advocates. For the Respondents : Mr. Anil Kumar Singh A.C. to Mrs. Nivedita Nirvikar, Advocate. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH
ORAL ORDER
(Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) 7 13-07-2012 Feeling aggrieved by the order dated 3rd January 2011 made by the learned single Judge in CWJC No. 5032 of 2010, the writ petitioner has preferred this Appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent.
The appellant, a Reader, retired from the constituent college of the Lalit Narayan Mithila University, Darbhanga (hereinafter referred to as ‘the University’) in 2005. In the above writ petition filed in 2010, he claimed for advancement of the date of his promotion as Reader from 14th November 1990 to 1st January 1986. The learned single Judge has dismissed the writ petition on the grounds of delay and laches. Therefore, this Appeal.
Patna High Court LPA No.289 of 2011 (7) dt.13-07-2012
2 / 3
The appellant had joined the service in the R. K. College, Madhubani, then an affiliated college, as Laboratory Assistant in 1963. In 1966 the said post of the Laboratory Assistant was re-designated as Demonstrator.
It is the claim of the appellant that the appellant was promoted to the post of Lecturer effective from 14th November 1980 under the University Notification dated 23rd May 1998. Consequent to the said promotion, under University Notification dated 20th December 2001, he was granted promotion as Reader effective from 14th November 1990. Later, under Government Notification dated 5th December 2002, his promotion as Lecturer was advanced to 1st January 1976. It is now the claim that consequent to advancement of his promotion as Lecturer with effect from 1st January 1976 his promotion as Reader should be correspondingly advanced effective from 1st January 1986.
Since his retirement in 2005, the appellant approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution in CWJC No. 2019 of 2009 to claim finalisation of terminal benefits. The said petition was disposed of on 10th February 2009. Since then the appellant once again came before this Court in above CWJC No. 5032 of 2010 for advancement of the date of promotion to the post of Reader.
Writ petition does not bear out that at any time, since the University Notification dated 5th December 2002 till the appellant retired from service in 2005, the appellant raised claim for advancement of the date of promotion as Reader. In the writ petition the appellant has not explained the delay; nor has he explained why could not he have asked for the said relief in the petition filed in 2009.
Patna High Court LPA No.289 of 2011 (7) dt.13-07-2012
3 / 3
In absence of any explanation, we agree with the learned single Judge that the claim raised in the present Appeal is stale and deserves to be dismissed on the grounds of delay and laches. The claim also deserves to be dismissed on the principle of constructive res judicata under Section 11 Explanation IV of the Code of Civil Procedure.
For the aforesaid reasons, Appeal is dismissed in limine .
(R.M. Doshit, CJ)
(Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J)
Sujit/-
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the claim for advancement of date of promotion as Reader is barred by delay and laches.
Whether the principle of constructive res judicata under Section 11 Explanation IV CPC applies to dismiss the claim.
Whether the appeal against the single Judge's order rejecting the writ petition should be allowed.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Arbind Kumar Jha
The Lalit Narayan Mithila University
The Vice Chancellor, Lalit Narayan Mithila University
The Registrar, Lalit Narayan Mithila University
The Finance Officer, Lalit Narayan Mithila University
The Principal, R.K. College
Chief Justice
Ahsanuddin Amanullah
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
