Ashutosh Kumar, J.—

Re. I.A. No. 1 of 2021 :

The aforesaid interlocutory application has been filed seeking condonation of delay of 333 days in preferring the present appeal.

2. For the reasons stated in the application, the delay in preferring this appeal is, hereby, condoned.

3. The I.A. No. 1 of 2021 stands allowed.

Re. L.P.A. No. 585 of 2021 :

We have heard Mr. Ramakant Sharma, the learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Mr. Rajesh Kumar for the appellant and Mr. Nadeem Seraj for the Patna University. The State is represented by Mr. Shashi Shekhar Tiwary.

2. The appellant has questioned the judgment of the learned Single Judge dated 15th of October, 2020 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 4772 of 2019, whereby his prayer for a direction to the Patna University (in short the University) to pay pension to him under the General Provident Fund-cum-Pension-cum-Gratuity Scheme for his having put in 24 years of service in the University, has been rejected.

3. Shorn of details, the facts of this case are stark, which disentitles the appellant from getting anything from the University as his post-retiral dues.

4. The appellant was appointed as a Lecturer in the Department of Geography of Patna University, sometimes in July, 1956. He was promoted to the post of Reader on 01.03.1974 and continued on such post till 1980.

5. The appellant had asked for an extraordinary leave, which was granted to him from 11.08.1980 to join the Department of Geography in Maharaja Sayajirao University, Barodra on lien, which was for two years. The appellant appears to have been appointed on the post of Professor at Maharaja Sayajirao University, Barodra permanently from where he retired in July, 1992. Since the lien granted to him was only for two years, within which time the appellant did not come back nor was he heard of by the University, the lien was cancelled with effect from 16.08.1982.

6. The appellant claims that without notice to him, the lien could not have been cancelled and that he is entitled for being paid his Pension for 24 years of service that he had rendered as Lecturer and Reader in the Department of Geography in Patna University. Since the lien was wrongly cancelled, the appellant shall be presumed to be in continuous service of the University, entitling him to be paid pension under the General Provident Fund-cum-Pension-cum-Gratuity Scheme.

7. It appears from the records that the appellant had opted for C.P.F. Scheme and while he was still working at Baroda, he withdrew his contribution, thereby totally disentitling him from questioning the decision of the University in not paying him Pension for 24 years of service that he had rendered in the University under the General Provident Fund-cum-Pension-cum-Gratuity Scheme.

8. Mr. Nadeem Siraj, the counsel for the University has pointed out that Section 24(b) of the Patna University Statutes provides that the provisions of Bihar Pension Rules shall be applicable when there is no specific provision in the Rules of the University. Rule 103 of the Bihar Pension Rules further clarifies that if a person remains absent unauthorizedly, the past service of such person shall be forfeited and such person shall not be entitled for any benefit under the Pension Rules.

9. The appellant had practically abandoned his service at Patna University and in token of his having accepted the fact, he also withdrew his contributions under the C.P.F. Scheme. This leaves him in an unenviable position of being disentitled from any further relief from the University.

10. Be that as it may, it would be necessary to record two other facts. When the lien of the appellant was terminated on account of his having not reported back to the University, he preferred a writ petition before this Court, which was disposed off with a direction/request to the Hon’ble Chancellor to look into his grievance and pass orders accordingly. The Hon’ble Chancellor, in turn, referred the matter to the Vice-Chancellor of the University to take an informed decision in th