Amit Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Letters Patent Appeal No.133 of 2022

¶2

In

¶3

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.9441 of 2020

¶4

======================================================

¶5

Amit Kumar, S/o Sri Anil Prasad Lal R/o Ward NO. 04, Sultan Pokhar, P.S. Forbesganj, Distt.-Araria.

¶6

Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal S/o Sri Shyam Lal Jaiswal, R/o 31, Mela Road, Ward NO. 07, P.S. Forbesganj, Distt.-Araria.

¶7

Satya Prakash S/o Sri Ramnath Sah R/o Ward no. 06, Subash Chowk, Forbesganj, Araria.

¶8

Md. Wasim Ahmad S/o Md. Taslim , R/o Gorihare Ward no. 18, Forbesganj, P.S. Farbesganj,Distt.-Araria.

¶9

Ranjeet Kumar Sahni @ Ranjeet Kumar S/o Sri Faguni Sahni R/o Ward no. 17, Kothi hat Road, P.S. Forbesganj, Distt.-Araria.

¶10

Vinay Kumar Sinha S/o Sri Ambika Prasad R/o Professor Colony, Ward no. 25, Forbesganj, Diostt-Araria.

¶11

Dinesh Kumar Varma S/o Sri Nagendra Prasad Varma, R/o High School Road, Ward no. 20, P.S. Forbesganj, Distt.-Araria.

¶12

Ram Narayan Roy S/o Shivshankar Roy, R/o Paswantola Ward no.1, P.S. Forbesganj, Distt-Araria.

¶13

Mukesh Kumar Pandey S/o Raghuvansh Pandey, Forbesganj Ward no. 04, P.S. Forbesganj, Distt-Araria.

¶14

... ... Appellant/s

¶15

Versus

¶16

The State of Bihar through the Secretary, Urban Development and Housing Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

¶17

The Special Secretary to the Government, urban Development and Housingh Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

¶18

The Chairman, Nagar Parisad, Forbesganj, District-Araria.

¶19

The District Magistrate, Araria.

¶20

The Executive Officer, Nagar Parishad, Forbesganj, District-Araria.

¶21

The Nagar Parishad Forbesganj through its Secretary, P.S. Forbesganj, DisttAraria.

¶22

... ... Respondent/s

¶23

====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant/s : Mr.Jai Prakash Verma, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr.Yogendra Prasad Sinha (AAG-7) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY

¶24

Patna High Court L.P.A No.133 of 2022 dt.22-01-2024 2/4

¶25

ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE)

¶26

Date : 22-01-2024

¶27

The writ petition is filed for regularisation of services of the petitioners, which was rejected by the learned Single Judge, against which the present appeal is filed.

¶28

The writ petition sought for a mandamus to the authorities to grant approval for regularisation of services, as recommended by the Executive Officer, Nagar Parishad, Forbesganj. The petitioners also claim for pay and benefits with retrospective effect from 26.08.2016; the petitioners having been appointed on contract basis between 2008 to 2011.

¶29

The learned Single Judge found that there was no policy of the State regarding regularisatoin of contractual employees and the decision in Secretary, State of Karnataka & Ors. v. Uma Devi(3) & Ors.; (2006) 4 SCC 1 read with the Full Bench decision of this Court in Ram Sevak Yadav & Anr. Vs. The State of Bihar & Ors.; 2013(i) PLJR 964 , does not apply.

¶30

It is not for the Executive Officer to frame a policy for the State nor is the State bound by the recommendation made by an Executive Officer. Uma Devi (supra) found the regularisation and permanent continuance of temporary, contractual, casual, daily-wage and adhoc employees

¶31

Patna High Court L.P.A No.133 of 2022 dt.22-01-2024 3/4

¶32

appointed/recruited and continued for long in employment, to be against the constitutional scheme envisaged in public employment. The Hon’ble Supreme Court also deprecated the practice of invoking the wide power under Article 226 to stay regular recruitment process, which effectively results in continuance of the adhoc appointments, leading to the principle of equity for all, being frustrated and it being confined to just a few; categorising such continuance also to be ‘litigious employment’.

¶33

It was also held that none appointed in a temporary, contractual or casual manner can have a legitimate expectation to be absorbed, regularised or permanently continued in employment. The Hon’ble Supreme Court also deprecated orders of the High Courts granting salary to the daily-wagers, as paid to regular employees from the date of their appointment; making it clear that, at best it could have been granted only from the date of its order. In fact, while directing consideration of regularisation of certain category of employees, in para-53, it has been specifically stated that such regularisation is a one time measure to protect the services of irregularly appointed employees in duly sanctioned post. It was also directed that regular appointments should be undertaken to fill those vacant

¶34

Patna High Court L.P.A No.133 of 2022 dt.22-01-2024 4/4

¶35

sanctioned posts, which process should be set in motion within six months.

¶36

Uma Devi (supra) did not at all provide for perpetuating such illegality by making contractual appointments and then granting regularisation later, which militates against the rule of equality and equity in public employment. We find absolutely no reason to interfere with the impugned judgment.

¶37

The Appeal stands dismissed.

¶38

Interlocutory application, if any, shall stand disposed of.

¶39

(K. Vinod Chandran, CJ)

¶40

( Rajiv Roy, J)

¶41

Sujit/-

¶42

AFR/NAFR	NAFR
CAV DATE
Uploading Date	03.02.2024
Transmission Date

Amit Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amit Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vikas Kumar Vs The Union of India

Dr. Poonam Singh, Vs The State of Bihar

Md. Shahid Vs The State of Bihar

Ms. Madhav Construction Vs The State of Bihar

M/s Surbhi Enterprises Vs The Union Of India

M/s Narayan Mandal Vs The Union of India