Yogita Singh vs The State Of Bihar
2023 Latest Caselaw 2250 Patna

Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 2250 Patna
Judgement Date : 10 May, 2023

Patna High Court

Yogita Singh vs The State Of Bihar on 10 May, 2023

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                      Letters Patent Appeal No.1067 of 2019
                                         In
                   Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.19791 of 2018
     ======================================================

1. Yogita Singh, Daughter of Sri Ramjee Singh, Resident of Mohalla- Civil Line, Ward No. 17, near Jai Ram Atta Mill, P.S.- Town Buxar, District- Buxar.

2. Punita Kumari, Wife of Sanjay Kumar, Resident of C/o - Pro Mani Shankar Prasad, Mohalla - Gajadhar Ganj, Collecteriate Road, P.S. - Town Buxar, District- Buxar.

... ... Appellant/s Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

2. The Principal Secretary, Social Welfare, Government of Bihar, Patna.

3. The Director, I.C.D.S., Bihar, Patna.

4. The Divisional Commissioner, Patna.

5. The District Magistrate, Buxar.

6. The District Programme Officer, I.C.D.S., Buxar.

7. Bindu Kumari (Complainant), Wife of Sunil Kumar Keshri, Resident of Station Road, Infront of D.A.V. School, P.O.- Gajadharganj, P.S.- Buxar (Town), District- Buxar.

... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Appellant/s : Mr. Sudhir Kumar Singh, Advocate Ms. Bandana Singh, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Gyan Prakash Ojha (GA-7) Mr. Umesh Kumar Mishra, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE)

Date : 10-05-2023

The appellants who were the petitioners before the

Writ Court were aggrieved by their termination. The appellants

admittedly were contract employees appointed after a due

selection process. One of the candidates, who was unsuccessful, Patna High Court L.P.A No.1067 of 2019 dt.10-05-2023

filed a complaint before the Commissioner, Patna Division. The

Commissioner found that there was some irregularity in the

appointment of five persons after an inquiry, but set aside the

entire selection made as illegal. All the 42 persons appointed in

the selection process were terminated. Writ-petitions were filed

consequent to the termination challenging the same and also the

fresh selection proceeded with for appointing contract

employees in the place of those terminated. One of such writ

petitions was dismissed directing the terminated persons also to

be included in the fresh selection process after giving them due

relaxation and also considering their seven years of service. An

appeal was filed from the aforesaid judgment in Letters Patent

Appeal No. 770 of 2019. A coordinate Bench of this Court

called for a report from the Director, ICDS who specifically

stated that irregularity was only in the case of five named

persons and the seventeen writ-petitioners therein were properly

appointed and they were qualified to be so appointed. The

selection hence was found to be legal and carried out in a proper

manner. The Division Bench held so in the operative portion of

the judgment:-

"In view of the facts and circumstances stated herein above, we respectfully disagree with the decision/observations of the learned Single Patna High Court L.P.A No.1067 of 2019 dt.10-05-2023

Judge passed in order dated 29.1.2019 in C.W.J.C. no. 18094 of 2018 and pass the following orders:

(i) The order contained in memo no. 401 dated 8.8.2018 of the Commissioner, Patna Division, Patna and order contained in memo no. 882 dated 13.8.2018 of the District Magistrate, Buxar impugned in the writ application are quashed so far as the appellants are concerned.

(ii) The appellants are directed to be reinstated in service with effect from the date of their termination with all consequential benefits.

(iii) The authorities concerned in the Social Welfare Department shall proceed with the process of selection for filling up the remaining vacancies after appointment of the appellants herein."

Learned senior counsel appearing for the appellants

submitted that in the LPA there was a stay of termination and

hence the appellants herein were continued. Definitely, the

benefit of the judgment of the coordinate Bench has to go to the

appellants also. In such circumstances, we find no reason to

sustain the order of the learned Single Judge which was prior to

the judgment of the coordinate Bench now placed before us in Patna High Court L.P.A No.1067 of 2019 dt.10-05-2023

L.P.A. No. 770 of 2019. In such circumstances, we follow the

aforesaid judgment and grant the same relief to the appellants

but, however, make it clear that the qualifications and eligibility

of the appellants will be verified and if at all the respondent

authorities want to make regular appointment then necessarily

the contractual appointees will have to give way.