JUDGMENT :

1. Heard the parties.

2. The petitioner has approached this Court for quashing the Notification contained in Memo No. 317/05 dated 5.8.2005 (Annexure-5), whereby the service of the petitioner has been absorbed with effect from 01.06.2003, instead of 5.12.1987 being the date, when the petitioner attained his eligibility, as per recommendation of Justice S.C. Agrawal Committee.

Factual Matrix

3. The facts of the case are short and not much in dispute. The petitioner was appointed and joined the post of Lecturer in Hindi Department on 22.2.1986 in S.N.J.S.N. College, Garhwa under the jurisdiction of Ranchi University (now Nilamber and Pitamber University, Palamau).

4. The dispute relating to absorption of teaching employees of the colleges, consequent upon their conversation into constituted units in 4th phase, had traveled up to the Supreme Court of India. A one Man Committee was formed under the orders of the Supreme Court, headed by Justice S.C. Agrawal (a retired Judge of the Supreme Court), who had made certain recommendations, which were accepted by the Supreme Court in the case of State of Bihar & Ors. Vs. Bihar Rajya MSESKK Mahasangh & Ors., reported in 2005 (1) PLJR 464. The Committee noticed that some of the teachers were appointed against the posts, which were not sanctioned by the State Government at the time of their appointment, but matter related to sanction was already pending with the State Government at that point of time. The Committee, in such cases, also recommended that the Lecturers would be entitled for absorption in the University service from the respective dates of their eligibility. In the report of the Justice Agrawal Commission, the name of the petitioner figured at page 1027, which clearly shows that this petitioner was appointed as Lecture in Hindi Department by order dated February, 22, 1986. Though on the date of appointment, the petitioner did not have high second class post graduation qualification, but he obtained MA degree with 65% marks on December 5, 1987. Therefore, the petitioner became eligible for consideration for appointment / absorption with effect from 5.12.1987.

5. In view of the recommendations made by the Commission and the Supreme Court in the case of State of Bihar & Ors. Vs. Bihar Rajya MSESKK Mahasangh & Ors. (supra), the University (respondent No.2) issued a notification contained in Memo No. 317/05 dated 5.8.2005, whereby the petitioner was absorbed with effect from 1.6.2003.

6. Again, the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India by order 22.1.2013 appointed Mr. Justice S.C. Agrawal to enquire into the claim of each of the employees (both teaching and non-teaching) for absorption in constituted colleges. However, Justice S.C. Agrawal declined to enquire and thereafter, Hon'ble Mr. Justice S.B. Sinha (Retd) had been appointed on 19.8.2013. Hon'ble Mr. Justice S.B. Sinha submitted the report in respect of the petitioner, which reads as under:

“So far as the case of Dr. Brij Kumar Mishra is concerned, he has been absorbed in the services of the University w.e.f. 01.06.2003, having regard to the fact that a post had been fallen vacant. It is stated that there was no recommended posts, and unfortunately the relevant documents could not be produced before Justice Agrawal Commission, the absorption of Dr. Brij Kumar Mishra, therefore, is upheld w.e.f. 01.06.2003”.

7. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner has approached this Court, stating that the finding of the Justice S.B. Sinha Commission is an apparent error on the face of the record. The petitioner has also made a representation before the respondent-University requesting therein to correct his date of absorption on 14.8.2019, i.e. after filing of the writ petition.

Submission of Petitioner

8. Mr. Neeraj Shekar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner strenuously submits that the impugned order dated 5.8.2005, absorbing the petitioner with effect from 1.6.2003, has been passed illegally and arbitrary. Learned counsel submits that orde