IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CWJC No.16035 of 2005
RAM SAGAR CHOUBEY & ORS
Versus
THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS
with
CWJC No.2918 of 2006
YADUNANDAN YADAV
Versus
THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS
-----------
4 8-3-2011 The petitioners in these two writ petitions were
appointed in the year 1982 as 4th grade employees in a college and
were subsequently terminated in 1991. They have come to this
court for regularization / absorption of their services in the light of
the order passed by this court in CWJC No. 1679/1999. One of
the issues raised by the petitioners is that they have been working
for a long period of time and the selection of fresh candidates was
not justified in view of the fact that the petitioners had the working
experience which has totally been ignored.
Before referring to the stand of the State, I would like
to refer to the order of this court in CWJC No. 1679/1999. The
facts indicate that the petitioners were working in accordance with
the staffing pattern and their services were approved on 14.1.1980
and 12.2.1983. It was their claim that they would come within the
purview of the law laid down by this court in the case of Brij
Kishore Singh vs. State of Bihar, 1997 (1) PLJR 509. The facts are
that the petitioners were appointed by the competent authority and
were working for the past twenty one years. The University was
well aware of the fact that the petitioners were working for the
2
past ten to fifteen years and as such the court directed that the case
of the petitioners should be considered for absorption against
sanctioned post / deemed sanctioned post under the staffing
pattern. The court also directed the University / college to fill up
the other post on regular basis giving weightage and preference to
the petitioners over the outsider, after relaxation of age. The
counter affidavit does not explain whether such weightage was
given to the experience of the petitioners. It only mentions that
relaxation of age was given.
Counsel for respondents 3 to 5 may obtain instructions
and file a supplementary counter affidavit clarifying the statements
made in paragraphs 16 to 18 of the counter affidavit within three
weeks.
List this case after three weeks at the top of the list.
haque ( Sheema Ali Khan, J.)