Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the University.

2. The petitioner, a Reader in Chemistry, C. M. Science College at Darbhanga, a constituent unit of the respondent University, is aggrieved by order of punishment dated 18.7.2012 transferring him to D. B. College, Jainagar, withdrawing two increments at the present basic pay and his erratic, impulsive and undisciplined behavior to be entered in his Service book.

3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits he has had an unblemished career since appointment as Lecturer in 1982, till the present allegations. The UGC revised pay scale was implemented from 1.1.1996. Readers who had completed five years of service were entitled to the specified scale. Denial of the same led to a large number of writ applications culminating in certain orders passed on 5.7.2010 in CWJC No. 18552 of 2009. The failure of the University to comply the order led to institution of contempt applications. The petitioner, in the circumstances, on 7.7.2012, called the Vice Chancellor on his mobile phone with a request to expedite matters in accordance with Court orders. The conversation lasted approximately 14-15 minutes. The petitioner was urging grievances, but unfortunately the Vice Chancellor abruptly directed him to terminate the conversation.

4. He was served with a show cause notice on 7.7.2012 alleging that he had used “Unparliamentary, filthy and ugly languages” during conversation in a high pitched voice. He was not prepared to listen and showed disrespect to the Vice Chancellor. He was opined as a habitual offender of code of conduct envisaged for University servants. The Vice Chancellor informed the Principal C.M.Science college of the utterances who also expressed his anguish and likewise opined that petitioner was habitual in breaking code of conduct detrimental to administrative and academic discipline.

5. This one alleged incident was construed to hold the petitioner to be a habitual offender of the Code of Conduct. The petitioner filed his reply, acknowledging conversation with the Vice Chancellor on the concerned date over mobile phone with regard to grant of UGC pay scale. The actual conversation lasted 2-3 minutes only. The rest of the time was consumed by the Vice Chancellor asking him to stay on line while he made enquiry from the office. No details of alleged foul language used or details of any alleged past conducts were mentioned. The petitioner specifically denied use of any foul language or that he was a habitual offender of the Code of Conduct. He also denied any untoward conduct at C. M. Science College at Darbhanga.

6. The matter was then considered by the Discipline Committee of the University under Statute 36 of the Bihar University Act (hereinafter called “the Statute”) which arrived at the conclusion that his behavior was erratic, impulsive and indisciplined, confirmed by the Vice Chancellor as Chairman of the Committee under the Statute.

7. Assailing the order it was next submitted that prudently, the Vice Chancellor was the complainant. Even if he was the Chairman of the Discipline Committee he was required to recluse himself from the disciplinary process. Official bias is inherent in the decision making process and that no one could be a judge in his own cause. What was informed by the Vice Chancellor to the Discipline Committee was not made known to the petitioner. The Discipline Committee did not hear the petitioner. The petitioner was also not privy to the conversation between the Principal and the Vice Chancellor with an opportunity to defend. Referring to the counter affidavit it is submitted that the allegations for other untoward conduct is based on materials subsequent to the show cause notice (7.7.2012) at Annexure D series to the counter affidavit which are all dated 17.7.2012, 11.7.2012 and 14.7.2012. On the contrary, the letter dated 17.7.2012 by the Professor and Head of Department of Chemistry states that the petitioner was a sincere