Supreme Court Directs University to Hold Enquiry and Decide Salary and Pension Claims of Absorbed Lecturer

A bench of Justices J.K. Maheshwari and Rajesh Bindal heard a contempt petition filed by Dr. Yugeshwar Yadav challenging non-finalisation of his arrears of salary and the withholding of pension following interim orders in earlier proceedings arising out of absorption of certain college teachers into Magadh University. The petition arose from directions and interim orders passed in Contempt Petition (C) No. 1188 of 2018 and Civil Appeal No. 2703 of 2017.

The Court disposed of the contempt petition and directed the Registrar/Vice‑Chancellor of the university to adjudicate the disputes concerning actual working days, ascertainable arrears of salary and pension after a fact‑finding enquiry. The Court noted that "the ascertainable arrears of salary have been paid and the excess amount is recoverable" and that it "did not deem it appropriate to keep these matters pending." The Court, in its reasoning, observed: "we find that the issues regarding actual working of the petitioner, payment of salary, arrears and excess payment require adjudication after fact-finding enquiry, which we are not inclined to hold in this Contempt Petition." It directed the petitioner to submit his claim with supporting documents, required a discrete enquiry with opportunity to the college, employee and State to be completed and a reasoned order to be passed within three months, directed pension claims to be decided notionally from date of absorption "uninfluenced by the orders dated 11.07.2019, 07.08.2019 and 12.02.2021", and required payment of any award within two months thereafter while permitting recovery proceedings in relation to any excess previously paid. The Court further clarified that dissatisfaction with the Registrar/Vice‑Chancellor's order would permit recourse to the High Court.

Background

The dispute arose after the petitioner, a lecturer, obtained a claim of absorption from the one‑man J. Sinha Commission; that order of absorption was confirmed by this Court on August 31, 2017 subject to a declaration regarding continuous service and non‑employment elsewhere, and Magadh University issued a notification of absorption dated July 13, 2018. The State filed a counter‑affidavit stating that ascertainable arrears for actual working days had been paid and that a two‑member enquiry committee, constituted in the aftermath of earlier orders in the Baidya Nath Choudhary contempt proceedings, found that the petitioner had not worked for certain duration(s) and that some amounts were therefore recoverable. The petitioner had by then attained superannuation and contended that arrears and pension had not been finalised.

The bench recorded that earlier interim orders in Contempt Petition (C) No. 1188 of 2018 related to absorbed employees receiving salaries for periods during which they had not actually worked and that those orders had, in effect, led to stoppage of pension. The Court observed that the question of pension "was not there" in the earlier interim orders and that an opportunity‑based fact‑finding enquiry had not been reported as completed. In view of State filings and the factual matrix, the Court declined to decide the factual issues within the contempt petition itself and instead issued directions for an administrative adjudication by the university in line with the decision in State of Bihar & others v. Bihar Rajya M.S.E.S.K.K.M & others (2005) 9 SCC 129. The contempt petition and pending interlocutory applications stood disposed.

Case No.: 2025 INSC 61; Contempt Petition (C) No. 1188 of 2018; Civil Appeal No. 2703 of 2017 Case Title: Dr. Yugeshwar Yadav v. Sanjay Kumar & Ors. Appearances: For the Petitioner(s): [Not indicated in the order] For the Respondent(s): [Not indicated in the order]