Patna High Court - Orders
Raj Ranjan And Ors vs The State Of Bihar And Ors on 11 July, 2019
Bench: Chief Justice, Anjana Mishra
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.5129 of 2009
======================================================
SANJAY KUMAR
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
THE STATE OF BIHAR and ORS
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
with
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 16183 of 2012
======================================================
Raj Ranjan and Ors
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State Of Bihar and Ors
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
with
Letters Patent Appeal No. 894 of 2016
In
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.7164 of 2014
======================================================
Ashutosh Jha
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
The State Of Bihar and Ors
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
with
Letters Patent Appeal No. 307 of 2016
In
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.18736 of 2014
======================================================
The State Of Bihar and Ors
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
Vidya Shankar Mishra and Ors
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
with
Letters Patent Appeal No. 1210 of 2010
======================================================
THE STATE OF BIHAR and ORS
Patna High Court CWJC No.5129 of 2009(28) dt.11-07-2019
2/5
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
MD.NISAR ALAM and ORS
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
with
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 18039 of 2008
======================================================
AZAD KUMAR SINGH
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
THE STATE OF BIHAR and ORS
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
(In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 5129 of 2009)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Bindhyachal Singh
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Aag3
(In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 16183 of 2012)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Umesh Kumar Mishra
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Nivedita Nirvikar
(In Letters Patent Appeal No. 894 of 2016)
For the Appellant/s : Mr.Umesh Kumar Mishra
For the Respondent/s : Mr.
(In Letters Patent Appeal No. 307 of 2016)
For the Appellant/s : Mr.Awadhesh Kumar
For the Respondent/s : Mr.
(In Letters Patent Appeal No. 1210 of 2010)
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Satyabir Bharti
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Alok Ranjan
Mr. Ashok Kumar Yadav
(In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 18039 of 2008)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Ebrahim Kabir
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Sc19
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
and
HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
(Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE)
28 11-07-2019Heard Shri Bindhyachal Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, and the learned Advocate General for the State of Bihar.
This writ petition was allowed on 17th of Patna High Court CWJC No.5129 of 2009(28) dt.11-07-2019 3/5 November, 2009. The issue raised in the petition is very simple, namely that the petitioner herein, who had applied for the post of Librarian, was possessed of the degree of Sahitya Alankar from Hindi Vidya Peeth, Deoghar which degree was not being accepted as a valid degree equivalent to Graduation for the purpose of appointment on the said post.
The Division Bench held in favour of the petitioner against which the State of Bihar preferred a Special Leave Petition before the Apex Court that was converted into Civil Appeal No.4274 of 2014. The said appeals were allowed by the Apex Court on 6th January, 2016, but the matter was remanded to be considered again by the High Court. The petitioner had by that time joined his services, but the same came to be terminated on 13th February, 2016 after the Supreme Court judgement. The order has been assailed in I.A. No.219 of 2017.
Subsequent thereto, the Government issued a notification on 8th April, 2016 which has been filed as Annexure 7 to the aforesaid I.A. The said notification categorically states that the earlier notification giving equivalence on 11 th January 1991 stands annulled with effect from 7th May, 2012 in the light of the decision of this Court in the case of Reeta Srivastava & Patna High Court CWJC No.5129 of 2009(28) dt.11-07-2019 4/5 Ors. vs. State of Bihar & Ors., reported in 2012 (3) P.L.J.R.
353. It may be noted that the date of delivery of the said judgement is 7.5.2012 and, therefore, the State Government appears to have made the notification effective from the date of the judgement of the learned Single Judge. It may not be out of place to mention here that two L.P.A's. were filed against the aforesaid judgement of the learned Single Judge being L.P.A. No.953 of 2012 and L.P.A. No.1303 of 2012 as well as other connected L.P.A's that came to be dismissed on 26.11.2012. Consequently, the judgement dated 7.5.2012 of the learned Single Judge has been upheld by the Division Bench.
However, the notification dated 08.04.2016 categorically in the last sentence states that any appointment or promotion made on the basis of the degree awarded prior to 7.5.2012 shall not be affected.
A clarification was sought by different Departments in respect of the aforesaid notification and the State Government sought the opinion of the learned Advocate General whereafter it issued another notification on 24.8.2017 that has been brought on record along with I.A. No.7827 of 2017. The said notification specifically clarifies that any appointments made on the basis of a degree obtained prior to Patna High Court CWJC No.5129 of 2009(28) dt.11-07-2019 5/5 7.5.2012 and between 7.5.2012 and 8.4.2016 shall remain unaffected.
The contention of the petitioner, therefore, is that in the present case, even though the advertisement was made in the year 2006 and selections held thereafter, the petitioner had to fight his litigative battle and, ultimately, he was granted appointment on 26.12.2015. The petitioner, therefore, contends that this appointment having been made prior to 8.4.2016 stands saved under the notification dated 24.8.2017 read with the notification dated 8.4.2016.
It is, therefore, submitted that such appointment could not have been invalidated, yet the services of the petitioner have been terminated on 13th February, 2016 that has been challenged as noted above.
The learned Advocate General prays that the matter be taken up on Wednesday.
Put up on Wednesday i.e. 17th July, 2019.
(Amreshwar Pratap Sahi, CJ) (Anjana Mishra, J) K.C.Jha/-
U