A writ petition against defalcation claims is not maintainable against a retired employee, emphasizing procedural adherence before pursuing legal remedies.

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL ORDER

2 31-01-2026 Heard the parties.

2. The petitioner is claiming to be Principal of Anup Lal Yadav Mahavidyalaya, Triveniganj, Supaul duly affiliated under B N Mandal University, Madhepura has approached this Court seeking a direction upon the respondents especially respondent no. 13 to immediately return/restore/refund the entire defalcated amount of Student Credit Card Funds, which was duly sanctioned by the Bihar State Education Finance Corporation Limited in favour of the student of the College, in question, for Session 2022-2023 to 2024-2025.

3. Learned Advocate for the University made a preliminary objection with regard to maintainability of the writ petition and submits at the bar that no writ petition would lie against the respondent no. 13, a retired employee against whom there is an allegation of defalcation while holding the post of Principal of the College for the period from September, 2012 to

31^st of May, 2025.

4. This Court finds substance in the submission of learned Advocate for the University and is of the opinion that the present writ petition is not maintainable, for the reasons aforenoted.

5. However, at this juncture, learned Advocate for the petitioner submits that the petitioner for redressal of the grievance has also approached before all the authorities, including the Vice-Chancellor/Registrar of the University, but no decision has been taken.

6. Having considered the submissions advanced by learned Advocate for the respective parties, the present writ petition stands consigned with a liberty to the petitioner to pursue his representation, the copy of which is marked as Annexures 4 and 5 series to the writ petition.

(Harish Kumar, J)