Pramath Patnaik, J.

In the instant writ application, the petitioner has inter alia prayed for direction upon the respondents to make payment of arrears of salary from March, 1986 to 31.10.1996 of the petitioner, which comes to Rs. 1,67,090.07/-along with interest thereupon in addition to compensation and cost.

2. The facts, which are necessary for adjudication, as delineated in the writ application, in brief is that to meet the shortage of lecturers in Ranchi University, as per the direction of H.E. the Governor-cum-Chancellor of the then unified State of Bihar to utilize the services of the qualified persons against the sanctioned posts of lecturers on lecture basis remuneration, the Registrar of the University vide letter dated 7th November, 1984 notified scheme for appointment of lecturers. Pursuant thereto, the petitioner being qualified was appointed on the post of lecturer w.e.f 27.10.1986 in Baharagora College in the department of English against sanctioned and vacant post. It has further been averred that petitioner continued to work on the post in question from January, 1986 to November, 1996 but no payment was made. In this regard, it has further been averred that the Hon’ble Supreme Court in SLP (Civil) No. 11078 of 1989 and analogous cases, preferred by ‘Ranchi University Ad hoc Teachers Association’, vide order dated 06.12.1989 with corrigendum dated 15.01.1990 directed all Universities of Bihar for status quo in respect of continuance of ad hoc teachers, however, direction was also given to University Service Commission to advertise the post of ad hoc teachers for direct recruitment within four months giving age relaxation. It has been averred that since the petitioner had been continuously worked for more than 14 years as Lecturer in the Department of English, he ought to have been regularized but even then when order was passed, the petitioner represented before the respondents-authorities but it did not evoke any response. In this regard, it has further been submitted that even the Human Resources Development Department, Higher Education, Government of Jharkhand, in compliance of order passed by Hon’ble Supreme Court directed the Registrar of the three Universities to send the names of ad hoc teachers who worked till 10.02.1989 and further the Joint Secretary, H.R.D. Department, Higher Education has also requested the Secretary, Jharkhand Public Service Commission to conduct special interview for ad hoc teachers who worked till 10.02.1989 for their regularization and absorption. It has further been averred that principal of the aforesaid college sent the names of ad hoc teachers, who worked against the sanctioned posts along with their bank account number, in which the name of the petitioner finds place at serial no. 10, which testifies and corroborates the appointment and working of the petitioner as lecturer in the department of English, but even also no payment has been made for the period aforesaid.

3. Heard Dr. Shree Krishna Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner; Mr. Dhananjay Kumar Dubey, Sr. S.C. I for the respondents-State and Dr. Ashok Kumar Singh, for the respondents Nos. 4 and 5.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted with vehemence that the respondents are bound to pay the salary of the petitioner for the period aforesaid, as the petitioner worked as lecturer in the Department of English during that period but no salary has been paid to him. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that even the name of the petitioner finds place in the list of ad hoc teachers prepared by the H.R.D Department at serial no. 10. It has been submitted that at the one hand respondents are accepting that petitioner worked as an ad hoc lecturer but on the other hand they are denying the payment in utter violation of Articles 14, 21, 39D and 300A of the Constitution of India. In the matter raised through ‘Ranchi University ad hoc Teachers’ Association’, the Hon’ble Supreme Court not only di