Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J. – Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. This writ application has been filed seeking a writ in the nature of a writ of certiorari to quash the order dated 24.10.2018 (Annexure- ‘7’ to the writ application) passed by a Committee comprising of respondent nos.6 to 9. The petitioner further prays for quashing of the consequential order dated 30.06.2021 (Annexure-‘9’ to the writ application) issued under the signature of Registrar of the University (respondent no.4) by which the service of respondent no.10 has been absorbed by respondent no.4.

3. The petitioner further prays for quashing the letter bearing no.GS-63/20-21 dated 26.04.2021 (Annexure- ‘8’ to the writ application) issued by the then In-charge Principal of the college (respondent no.5). The petitioner also prays for a writ of mandamus commanding the respondent nos.2 to 4 to pay his arrears as well as the current salary which have been withheld by the respondent University.

Brief facts of the case

4. It is the case of the petitioner that he was appointed as Laboratory In-charge in the Department of Chemistry/Zoology by the competent authority in the Parwati Science College, Madhepura vide Memo No.154 dated 29.10.1985. He joined on the said post on 30.10.1985.

5. The college in question was taken over with other 39 colleges in the erstwhile State of Bihar. A Three Men Committee was constituted for making verification of genuine and correct teaching and non-teaching employees working in the college and the name of the petitioner was found working as Laboratory In-charge, Department of Zoology in place of Chemistry.

6. It is stated that due to some controversies as to how many sanctioned posts of teachers and non-teaching employees were there in the 40 colleges which were converted into constituent colleges pursuant to the sanction letter dated 19.08.1986 of the State of Bihar and how many would be entitled for absorption, the matter travelled to the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in Civil Appeal No.6098 of 1997 and other analogous cases which arose out of the order passed by this Court in CWJC No.4021 of 1995. The Hon’ble Supreme Court was pleased to constitute Hon’ble Mr. Justice S.C. Agrawal Committee to examine the case of teaching and non-teaching staffs of the college made constituent in 4th phase. The said One Man Committee was authorized to examine and to report on the reference made by the Hon’ble Supreme Court.

7. It is stated that the Hon’ble Justice Agrawal Committee has examined each and every case of teaching and non-teaching staffs working in the college and while answering the term of reference, the Committee gave the three separate lists. The name of the petitioner is mentioned against R-1 post in the report. Contrary to the said position of the petitioner, the name of respondent no.10 was neither found working against the sanctioned post “S” or R-1 post. The Hon’ble Supreme Court, later on accepted the One Man Committee report vide its judgment in the case of State of Bihar & others vs. Bihar Rajya M.S.E.S.K.K. Mahasangh & others reported in (2005) 9 SCC 133. In paragraph ‘73’ of the said judgment, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has accepted the Justice Agrawal Commission Report and rejected all the objections on the said report.

8. In the abovementioned background, this Court heard the matter on 22.08.2023. The submissions made on behalf of the parties have been recorded by this Court in its order dated 22.08.2023. From paragraph 3 to 18 of the order which are being extracted hereunder for a ready reference: –

“3. Mr. Subodh Kumar Jha, learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Bihar and Others vs. Bihar Rajya M.S.E.S.K.K. Mahasangh and Others reported in(2005) 9 SCC 129. Paragraph ‘73’ thereof under which the conclusions have been derived by the Hon’ble Supreme Court have been referred to. It is submitted that the case of the petitioner fell under Paragraph ‘4’ of t