IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.8381 of 2025 ======================================================

1. Subodh Kumar Sudhanshu, Son of Kartik Das, Resident of care of Basant Das, Ward No.- 1, P.O.- Belhar, P.S.- Belhar, District- Banka, Pin Code-

813202.

2. Kumari Nutan Keshri, Daughter of Ugramohan Keshari, Resident of S.M.College Road, Near Maa Tara Lage, Shiri Ghat, P.O. and P.S.-

Jagdishpur, District- Bhagalpur, Pin Code- 812001.

3. Kumar Prashant, Son of Rajendra Prasad Thakur, Resident of 46, College Road, Choudhary Colony, P.O. and P.S. and District- Sahebganj (Jharkhand), Pin Code- 816109. ... ... Petitioner/s Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Additional Chief Secretary, Education Department, Bihar, Patna.

2. Director, Higher Education, Education Department, Bihar, Patna.

3. Authorised Officer, Pay Verification Cell, Education Department, Bihar, Patna.

4. Tilka Manjhi Bhagalpur University, Bhagalpur through its Registrar.

5. Vice Chancellor, Tilka Manjhi Bhagalpur University, Bhagalpur.

6. Registrar, Tilka Manjhi Bhagalpur University, Bhagalpur.

... ... Respondent/s ======================================================

Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Abhinav Shrivastava, Sr. Advocate Mr. Pushkar Bhardwaj, Advocate Md. Tauseef Waquar, Advocate Mr. Akshat Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Dhurendra Kumar, AC to GP- 5 For the University : Mr. Ashhar Mustafa, Advocate Ms. Anita Kumari, Advocate ======================================================

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR

ORAL JUDGMENT

Date : 13-01-2026 Heard Mr. Abhinav Shrivastava, learned Senior Advocate with Mr. Pushkar Bhardwaj, learned Advocate for the petitioners and the learned Advocate for the University. The State is represented by Mr. Dhurendra Kumar, learned Advocate.

2. The petitioners, presently posted and working against different non-teaching posts in the services of the Tilka Manjhi Bhagalpur University, Bhagalpur (hereinafter referred to as ‘the University’), have preferred the present writ petition seeking quashing of the Pay Verification Letters (as contained in Annexure-12 Series to the writ petition) issued by the concerned authorities under the Pay Verification Cell of Education Department of the State Government whereby the salaries admissible in favour of the petitioners is said to have been wrongly fixed contrary to fixation of their salaries having been done by the Statutory Pay Fixation Committee of the University.

3. Learned Senior Advocate for the petitioners taking this Court through the various annexures appended to the writ petition has primarily contended that there is no confrontation that the petitioners were initially appointed and their services were confirmed on their respective posts vide Annexures-P/7 and P/10 of the writ petition. They have also been granted the revision of their respective pay scales and finally extended the benefit of M.A.C.P. At no point of time any objections have been raised, as all the benefits have been bestowed by the order of the Statutory Pay Fixation Committee of the University. However, all of a sudden the impugned Pay Verification Letters came to be issued, the copies of which have been placed on record as Annexures- 12 Series, slashing down the pay scale and consequent salary of the petitioners.

4. While assailing the action of the concerned respondent authorities of the Pay Verification Cell, learned Senior Advocate for the petitioners vehemently contended that besides the impugned Pay Verification Letters are wholly arbitrary and without jurisdiction, the same has been issued unilaterally without giving notice or opportunity of hearing to the University as well as the aggrieved petitioners. The action of the respondents is also said to be in the teeth of the mandate of this Court rendered in C.W.J.C. No. 7636 of 2014 (Dr. Kedar Nath Pandey & Ors. Vs. Magadh University, Bodhgaya &

Ors.), reported in, 2015(1) PLJR 574

5. Taking this Court thro