This court allowed the writ petition, holding that petitioners appointed under 1979 circular are entitled to confirmation in service based on the precedents set in C.W.J.C. No. 169 of 2007, even if subsequent restrictive circulars were issued.
Confirmation of service in the posts held by the petitioners.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.15320 of 2006
======================================================
.... .... Petitioner/s Versus
.... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Prabhakar Singh 2 For the Respondent/s : Mr. (AAG3)
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SAMARENDRA PRATAP SINGH ORAL ORDER
3 29-10-2013 Petitioners pray for quashing of the order dated 1.6.2005 issued vide memo no. 2069 by the Commissioner cum Secretary, Department of Commercial Taxes, Bihar, Patna whereby representation filed by the petitioner for confirmation of
Patna High Court CWJC No.15320 of 2006 (3) dt.29-10-2013
2/4
the service in light of order dated 4.4.2005, passed in C.W.J.C.No. 2467 of 2001 has been rejected.
The short facts of the case are that the petitioners and one Satyadeo Prasad and Ajay Kumar Srivastawa were appointed as clerk in the office of Joint commissioner, Tirhuit Division, Muzaffarpur under office order dated 26.11.1979, Annexure 6.The said appointments were made pursuant to interview in light of advertisement dated 10.9.1979. All the 6 posts were duly sanctioned and necessary roster clearance was taken. The appointees continued in service. However no order with respect to their confirmation was issued by the Department. This led to two of the employees, namely, Satyadeo Prasad and Ajay Kumar Srivastawa to move this Court in C.W.J.C.No. 169 of 2007.
The respondents in their counter affidavit in the said case stated that the Commissioner, Commercial Taxes, Patna Division vide his letter no. 10684 dated 22.12.1980, Annexure -A had issued instructions to Joint Commissioner (Administration), Commercial Taxes not to make appointment on Class III and IV posts without seeking permission from the Headquarters. On the other hand, the counsel for the employees had agreed that the order of Commissioner, Commercial Taxes became operational only prospectively from December, 1980, whereas they were
Patna High Court CWJC No.15320 of 2006 (3) dt.29-10-2013
3/4
appointed much prior to issuance of the said order in the year 1979. The writ petition was disposed of with following directions:-
directions:-
‘Aforesaid submission made in the counter affidavit is being refuted by the counsel for the petitioner with reference to the circular of the Commissioner, Commercial Taxes bearing no. 7833 dated 12.7.1979, Annexure 2, whereunder the Joint Commissioner, Administration has been authorized to make appointment against the sanctioned class III, IV post in their Division. It is plain that circular letter no. 10684 dated 22.12.1980 has cancelled the earlier circular letter dated 12.7.1979 with effect from the date of issue of the subsequent circular letter dated 22.12.1980 but prior to the cancellation of the circular letter dated 12.7.1979 petitioners stood already appointed by the Joint Commissioner (Administration).’
The petitioners state that they have been appointed in the same transaction and by this time they have put in more than 34 years of service and one of the petitioners has already retired.
I find that the case of the petitioners is on similar footing as that of Satyadeo Prasad and Ajay Kumar Srivastawa (petitioners of C.W.J.C.No. 169 of 2007).The order dated 8.7.2011 passed in C.W.J.C.No. 169 of 2007 would also govern the case of the petitioners of the instant writ petition. Furthermore, the order passed by the learned Single judge in C.W.J.C.No. 169 of 2007 was challenged in LPA No. 1537/2012 without success. According to the petitioners, pursuant to the direction of this
Patna High Court CWJC No.15320 of 2006 (3) dt.29-10-2013
4/4
Court in C.W.J.C.No. 169 of 2007, the two employees have already been confirmed in service.
This writ petition is allowed in terms of the directions issued vide order dated 8.7.2011, passed in C.W.J.C.No. 169/2007.
Shashi.
(Samarendra Pratap Singh, J)
2 issues framed by the court
Whether petitioners entitled to confirmation of service given prior appointment before restrictive circulars.
Whether order dated 8.7.2011 in connected writ petition applies to instant petitioners.
Sunil Kumar
Sarojit Kumar Singh
Israil Ahmad
Chandreshwar Prasad
State of Bihar
Commissioner cum Secretary, Department of Commercial Taxes, Bihar
Samarendra Pratap Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
