ORAL JUDGMENT

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the respondents.

2. Considering the fact that all the writ petitions involve the same question of fact and law, with the consent of the parties, they are heard together and are being disposed of by this common order.

3. The present batch of writ petitions involve issue of appointment of 129 non-teaching employees on different posts and their regularization after scrutiny by 3-men Committee Constituted by the University. After regularization, the State step in and started scrutiny with regard to legality and validity of the initial appointment of the petitioners. Finally the State Constituted a 3-men Committee to examine the legality and validity of appointment of 129 non-teaching staff working in different constituent units of Veer Kunwar Singh University.

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits that all the petitioners were appointed in the constituent colleges initially under Magadh University but later on after bifurcation, the colleges in question became the constituent units of Veer Kunwar Singh University. The contention of the petitioners in the present batch of writ petitions is that they have been appointed in different colleges on account of increased work load and within the parameters of staffing pattern.

5. Counsel for the petitioners has drawn the attention of this Court to the background in which the agreement was reached in between the State Government and the Federation of the non-teaching employees and the policy decision of the State Government with regard to admission of deemed sanctioned post in the category of staffing pattern. They submitted that after 1980 on account of increase of the intake capacity in the college and introduction of new courses necessitated additional staff whereas for decades no appointment was made on any post of non-teaching employees in any of the Universities in Bihar, the appointments were made in exigency of situation. The controversy as to validity of appointment on the deemed sanctioned post/staffing pattern vis-a-vis Control of the State in terms of Section 35 of the Bihar State Universities Act (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) on appointment in Universities led to the constitution of a full Bench. The Full Bench of the Patna High Court has occasion to consider the issue of staffing pattern in the case of Braj Kishore Singh v. State of Bihar 1997 (1) BLJR 652 : 1997 (1) P.L.J.R. 509. The Full Bench speaking through of Hon’ble S.N.Jha,J.(as his lordships then was) has noted the requirement of non-teaching staff in the matter of imparting education in the colleges and the Full Bench on consideration of the staffing pattern in terms of the agreement of the Federation of non-teaching employees and the State Government and the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Direct Recruits Engineers case: AIR 1990 SC 1906, red down the rigour of Section 35 of the Act. Following the judgment of the Full Bench the State Government has also formulated its own scheme by issuing letter no. 1820 dated 17th November, 1998 and the Hon’ble High Court on numerous occasions issued direction for consideration of the nonteaching employees for regularization in the light of the judgment of the Full Bench in the case of Braj Kishore Singh (Supra) and the process of regularization has been sanctioned by the State Government as discussed hereinabove in the letter No. 1820 dated 17.11.1998 which is still holding the field. In most of the cases in the batch of writ petitions petitioners have approached this Court and considering their claim as to working within the staffing pattern, different courts have passed orders for consideration of their cases for regularization in terms of the judgment of the Full Bench in the case of Braj Kishore Singh(Supra). The University exercising jurisdiction vested under the Universities Act examined the case of regularization of these 129 non teaching employees decided to regulari