UMESHWAR PANDEY, J. - (1.) THE petitioner. Dr. Priya Kant Chaube has approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India with the following prayers : (a) To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to comply with the order dated 7.7.1994 (Annexure -8) passed by Vice -Chancellor and report of Sub -committee dated 19.6.1994 (Annexure 6 and 7), which has become final and binding upon the respondents. (b) To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent No. 2 to issue No Dues Certificate to the petitioner in pursuance of order dated 7.7.1994. (c) To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to pay the arrears of salary, gratuity, pension and all benefits arising thereof since 4.9.1967 to the petitioner.
(2.) BRIEF facts of the case as disclosed in the petition are that the petitioner obtained degree of Ayurvedic Bachelor of Medicine and Surgery (A.B.M.S.) from Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi, which is equivalent to the degree of M.B.B.S. The petitioner was appointed as an Honorary Medical Officer with Kashi Vidyapeeth on 18.12.1962 on an honorarium of Rs. 50 per month. On the recommendation of the Management of Kashi Vidyapeeth, he was appointed as temporary Medical Officer in the year 1965. This appointment was made effective from 10.10.1963 on fixed pay of Rs. 150 per month. This state of affair of petitioner's employment as temporary Medical Officer in Kashi Vidyapeeth continued till 1967 when with effect from 4.9.1967, he was appointed as permanent Medical Officer. He, however, continued receiving fixed pay only, which was increased upto Rs. 1,500 per month and which he was getting till the end of his career with Vidyapeeth. He used to attend to eight hours duty as Medical Officer out of which two hours each he would spend sitting in the hostel dispensary and Health Centre and for four hours he used to devote visiting the patient, students and staff of the University. He was provided with the facility of Provident Fund and Earned Leave with effect from 28.8.1965 till the date of his retirement (9.10.1994). After passing of the U. P. State Universities Act, 1973, Kashi Vidyapeeth was declared as a University with effect from 16.12.1973. Under the provisions of the said Act, every person employed before the effective date in Kashi Vidyapeeth, became an employee of the University on the same terms and conditions on which he was working. The petitioners thus, alleges that he became confirmed Medical Officer of Kashi Vidyapeeth University. In spite of his repeated request for a regular pay scale as is payable to the Medical Officers employed with other Universities the respondents did not accede to the same by making an order to that effect and instead, the Vice Chancellor sent requisition to the State Government for creation of a permanent post of Medical Officer. He also, on 24.5.1985, took a declaration from the petitioner that he was agreeable to work as Medical Officer with the University on fixed pay till the post of Medical Officer is created and his appointment on that post is made. Accordingly, the Vice Chancellor on 8.6.1985 passed an order to that effect. After the petitioner's repeated correspondence, the Executive Council of Kashi Vidyapeeth passed a resolution on 17.2.1994 appointing a Sub -committee to decide the question as to whether the petitioner would get regular pay scale of Medical Officer or he should be continued with fixed pay only. The Committee was headed by Justice G.D. Dubey (retired) with Professor Paras Nath Dwivedi and Professor Basu Dev Singh as its members. The decision of the Executive Council was communicated to the Chairman and Members of the sub -committee by the Registrar vide his letter dated March 18, 1994 (Annexure -5 to the writ petition). The sub -committee communicated its findings dated 19.6.1994 to the Vice Chancellor through Justice Dubey's letter dated July 4, 1994 (Annexure -8 to the writ petition). The Sub -committee by a majority decision recommended that the petitioner Dr. Chaube should be allowed the regular pay scale of a Medical Officer as is admissible to such Medical Officers in other Universities. He should also be made entitled to the retiral benefits to be fixed in such manner as would be fixed in a case of a Medical Officer with regular pay scale. This decision was taken by the Chairman and one Member of the sub -committee whereas the other Member Prof. Basu Dev Singh dissented from the majority view and recorded a finding that since the petitioner, Dr. Chaube was not a full time Medical Officer in Kashi Vidyapeeth and he worked all through on fixed pay only, he was not entitled to the regular pay scale of a full time Medical Officer as is admissible in other Universities. In the dissenting opinion, Prof. Basu Dev Singh, however, found that the retiral benefits as would be admissible under Rules on the fixed pay of Rs. 1,500 to the petitioner Dr. Chaube, should be allowed to him on his superannuation.
(3.) AFTER receipt of the report of sub -committee, the Vice Chancellor, respondent No. 1 directed the Registrar to implement the recommendations treating it to be a decision of the Executive Council and passed order dated July 7, 1994 (Annexure -4 to the writ petition). In spite of this direction of the Vice Chancellor, the recommendations of the Committee were not given effect. Accordingly, the petitioner gave reminders to the Registrar (Annexures -9 and 10 to the writ petition) but it was of no avail and finally the petitioner retired from service of Kashi Vidyapeeth on 10.10.1994 whereafter he addressed a letter (Annexure -11 to the writ petition) dated 12.10.1994 to the Vice Chancellor for implementing and acting upon the report of the sub -committee. Thereupon the Vice Chancellor directed the Registrar to put up the relevant file with his notes. No positive result, however, could be noticed even thereafter and the order of the Vice Chancellor passed on the report of the sub -committee was not complied with. Accordingly, the petitioner addressed a representation to the Chancellor (Governor) of the University (Annexure -12 to the writ petition). A request was made to the Chancellor to interfere into the matter and issue directions to the Vice Chancellor of the University to implement the decision of the sub -committee. Copies of the representation to the Chancellor were also given to the Vice Chancellor and Registrar of the University.;