Disposed

Jawahar Ram v. the State of Bihar and Ors.

Patna HC24 Feb 2009CWJC/10451/2002

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge disposed of writ petitions challenging termination of daily rated workers. Court followed precedent to refer claim of regular appointment to a Committee, setting aside an annexure for limited purpose without automatic reinstatement.

What did the court decide?

Writ application disposed with liberty to petitioners to submit representations for examination by a Committee; Annexure 6 set aside for limited purpose.

Jawahar Ram Vs the State of Bihar and Ors. — Service and Employment | Patna HC (2009)

¶1

 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
 CWJC Nos.10451 of 2002
 JAWAHAR RAM, son of Sri Jaipat Ram, resident of Village
 & PO Harpur, PS Harpur, District West Champaran
………………………. Petitioner
 With
CWJC No.10509 of 2002
 RAM DHANI RAM, son of Late Parmeshwar Ram, resident of
 Village & PO Banuchapra, PS Muffasil Bettiah,
 District West Champaran
 ……………..Petitioner

¶2

 Versus

¶3

1. THE STATE OF BIHAR through the Commissioner cum Secretary, PHED, New Secretariat,Patna-1

¶4

2. The Engineer in Chief, Public Health Engineering Department (PHED), New Secretariate, Patna-1

¶5

3. The Chief Engineer, PHED, At & PO Muzaffarpur District Muzaffarpur

¶6

4. The Superintending Engineer, PHED, At & PO Motihari, District West Champaran

¶7

5. The Executive Engineer, PHED, Division At & PO Bettiah, District West Champaran. …………………….. Respondents in both cases

¶8

-----------

¶9

24.02.2009 Heard leaned Counsel for the petitioners and the learned Counsel for the State.

¶10

The petitioners are aggrieved by the order dated 13.4.2002 terminating their services from the post of daily rated Mazdoor.

¶11

This Court finds substance in the submission of the petitioners that the impugned order was in violation of the principles of natural justice inasmuch as no show cause notice was issued to the petitioners of any alleged irregularity/illegality in the appointment.

¶12

Paragraph 2 of the impugned order dated 13.4.2002 itself visualises myriad possibilities and the consequent willingness of the respondents to reconsider individual case of termination if the requirements as mentioned therein were fulfilled.

¶13

Learned Counsel for the State, in that view of the matter, fairly submits that this writ application may be disposed off in

¶14

terms of the order of the Division Bench in the case of Ram Tapeshewar Sah & others Versus The State of Bihar, 2006(3) PLJR 376 by which such matters have been referred to a Committee constituted under the orders of this Court for examination.

¶15

This writ application is disposed with liberty to the petitioners to submit their representation in terms of their claim of a regular appointment to be examined by the aforesaid Committee and a decision taken with regard to them within a maximum period of three months from the date of receipt and/or production of a copy of this order.

¶16

Annexure 6 is set aside for that limited purpose only and does not result in reinstatement of the petitioners automatically

¶17

but shall remain subject to the final recommendation of the

¶18

Committee.
Snkumar/-
(Navin Sinha,J.)

Jawahar Ram v. the State of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jawahar Ram v. the State of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bihar State Survey and Settlemen Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Suresh Prasad Singh Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Hav.Shiv Shanker Choudhary Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Varun Kumar Vs the Director,National Institut

Amit Kumar Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Jagdeep Ram Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.