IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W.P.(S) No. 3931 of 2011
Sukhdeo Bhagat & others ... Petitioners
Versus
The State of Jharkhand & others ... Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D. N. PATEL
For the petitioners : M/s Sujit Narayan Prasad, B. Burman, Advocates
For the JharkhandState: J.C. to S.C.I
For the BiharState : Mr. S.P. Roy, Advocate
th
02: Dated 14 September, 2011
1.
The present petitioners claim to be appointed as a Nonmedical
ClassIII post in the Health Department of the Government of Bihar in the
year 1987. The respondent authorities terminated the petitioners from
service mainly on the ground that in pursuance of the direction, issued by
Hon’ble Patna High Court, an inquiry committee was constituted in order to
asses the legality propriety of the appointments made in the Leprosy Wings
of the Health Department since it was reported that all the appointments
have been made illegally by the authority, who was not competent to make
such appointment. It was pointed out in the inquiry report, dated 31st
December, 2008, that all the appointments dehors the law. This report was
again challenged in C.W.J.C. No. 6575 of 2009 and other analogous cases
and Hon’ble Panta High Court has quashed the aforesaid report vide order
dated 6th October, 2009. This order passed by Hon’ble Patna High Court in
the aforesaid writ petition was also confirmed vide order dated 29th March,
2011 in L.P.A. No. 230 of 2011.
2. Counsel for the petitioners further submitted that similarly situated
persons over here, in the State of Jharkhand, has also preferred writ
petition, bearing W.P.(S) No. 6400 of 2002, which was being decided in
favour of those petitioners by order dated 28th June, 2011. Petitioners’ case
is in similar footing with the petitioners of the aforesaid C.W.J.C. No. 6575
of 2009 and W.P.(S) No. 6400 of 2002 and therefore, suitable direction may
be given to respondent no. 2 to consider the case of the petitioners in the
light of the decision rendered by Hon’ble Patna High Court, vide order
dated 6th October, 2009 in C.W.J.C. No. 6575 of 2009, order dated 29th
March, 2011 rendered in L.P.A. No. 230 of 2011 as well as the decision
rendered by this Court in W.P.(S) No. 6400 of 2002 dated 28th June, 2011
2.
within a stipulated time to be given by this Court.
3. I have heard counsel for the respondents, who has submitted that
they do not have much objection, if such a direction is given to respondent
no. 2 to treat this writ petition as a representation and decide the claim
made in this writ petition in accordance with law, within the stipulated
time, as given by this Court. Counsel for respondent nos. 5 to 8 submitted
that petitioner no. 3 namely, Kundan Kumar Sinha, was appointed by the
State of Bihar and is working as such at the State of Bihar and therefore,
his writ petition should have been preferred before Hon’ble High Court at
Patna.
4. In view of the aforesaid limited submissions, I, hereby, direct
respondent no. 2 to treat this writ petition as a representation and decide
the claim made by the petitioners taking into consideration the decision
rendered by Hon’ble Patna High Court vide order dated 6th October, 2009,
in C.W.J.C. No. 6575 of 2009, the order dated 29th March, 2011 rendered in
L.P.A. No. 230 of 2011 as well as the decision rendered by this Court in W.P.
(S) No. 6400 of 2002 dated 28th June, 2011 and dated 12th August, 2011 in
W.P.(S) No. 2918 of 2011 for appointment on the post they were working in
accordance with law, rules, regulations, policies and Government
enforceable orders, applicable to the petitioners as expeditiously as possible
and practicable, preferably within a period of sixteen weeks, from the date
of receipt of a copy of an order of this Court, after giving an adequate
opportunity of being heard to the petitioners or to their representatives.
5. In view of the above directions, this writ petition is disposed of.
( D.N. Patel, J. )
VK