Ram Suresh Dubey Vs The State of Bihar

====================================================== 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

¶16

Date : 05-01-2026

¶17

In the instant petition, petitioner has prayed for the

¶18

following relief(s):-

¶19

“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

¶20

Patna High Court CWJC No.10051 of 2019 dt.05-01-2026 2/9

¶21

respondent no. 8 has been absorbed/regularized as Laboratory-inCharge 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.”

¶22

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.

¶23

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 IV^th phase constituent colleges of the said university in exercise

¶24

Patna High Court CWJC No.10051 of 2019 dt.05-01-2026 3/9

¶25

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.

¶26

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:-

¶27

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

¶28

Patna High Court CWJC No.10051 of 2019 dt.05-01-2026 4/9

¶29

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

¶30

Kkikad % G.S.I-D/ 116/ 50/09 izfrfyfi lwpukFkZ ,oa vko”;d dk;ZokbZ gsrq iszf’kr %&

¶31

1- lacaf/kr O;fDr

¶32

2- l a caf/kr iz/kkukpk;Z]

¶33

3- jkT;iky ds iz/kku lfpo] jktHkou iVukA

¶34

4- vk;qDr&lg&lfpo] ekuo lalk/ku fodkl foHkkx ¼mPp f”k{kk½] fcgkj ljdkj iVukA

¶35

5- funs”kd mPp f”k{kk foHkkx] fcgkj ljdkj iVukA

¶36

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

¶37

Patna High Court CWJC No.10051 of 2019 dt.05-01-2026 5/9

¶38

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.

¶39

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.

¶40

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

¶41

Patna High Court CWJC No.10051 of 2019 dt.05-01-2026 6/9

¶42

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.

¶43

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.

¶44

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

¶45

Patna High Court CWJC No.10051 of 2019 dt.05-01-2026 7/9

¶46

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.

¶47

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.

¶48

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

¶49

Patna High Court CWJC No.10051 of 2019 dt.05-01-2026 8/9

¶50

S.B.Sinha’s committee and his name was not been found appropriate for consideration.

¶51

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, ViceChancellor 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

¶52

Patna High Court CWJC No.10051 of 2019 dt.05-01-2026 9/9

¶53

consequential benefits for which the petitioner is found entitled in

¶54

law.

¶55

13. The instant writ petition stands disposed of.

¶56

(Ajit Kumar, J)

¶57

abhishekkr/-
AFR/NAFR	NAFR
CAV DATE	NA
Uploading Date	16.01.2026
Transmission Date	NA

Ram Suresh Dubey v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ram Suresh Dubey v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bhup Narayan Mishra Vs The State of Bihar

Deena Prasad @ Dinesh Prasad Vs The State of Bihar

Vinod Kumar @ Vinod Ray Vs The State of Bihar

Md. Waris Alam Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Pushpa Kumari Vs State of Bihar

Abhimanyu Prasad Singh Vs The State of Bihar