Patna High Court - Orders
Ramadhar Ram vs The State Of Bihar on 23 March, 2023
Author: Rajeev Ranjan Prasad
Bench: Rajeev Ranjan Prasad
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.8669 of 2016
======================================================
1. Sudhanshu Kumar Singh Son of Late Kailashpati SIngh, Resident of
Mohalla- Chakbinda, Road No. 16, Gardanibag, P.S. Gardanibag, District-
Patna.
2. Jagdish Ram, son of Sri Sanichar Ram, Resident of Village- Habaspur, P.O.
Dumra, P.S. Aurangabad.
3. Gorakh Tiwari, Son of Late Chandradeo Tiwary, Resident of Village- Pipra
Khurd, P.S. Kargahar, District- Rohtas.
4. Deepak Kumar Son of Manohar Prasad Singh, Resident of Village- Kheri
Hasanpur, P.S. Kheri, District- Munger.
5. Dinkar Sharma, Son of Sri Raghunandan Singh, Resident of Village- Dehri
Sheikhpura, P.S. Sheikhpura, Distirct- Sheikhpura.
6. Basuki Nath Sharma, Son of Ramugrah Narian Singh, Resident of Village-
Kab, P.S. Bikram, Rani Talab, District- Patna.
7. Manoj Kumar, son of Late Parshuram Prasad Singh, Resident of VIllage-
Dumraon, P.O. Asthama, P.S. Abada Chak, District- Nalanda at Biharsharif.
... ... Petitioners
Versus
1. The State Of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Secretary, Animal and Fisheries Resources Department, Government of
Bihar, Patna.
3. The Director, Animal Husbandary, Animal Husbandry Directorate, BIhar,
Patna.
4. The District Animal Husbandry Officer, Rohtas at Sasaram, District- Rohtas
at Sasaram.
5. The District Animal Husbandry Officer, Lakhisarai, District- Lakhisarai.
6. The Sub-Divisional Animal Husbandry Officer, Danapur, Patna, District-
Patna.
7. The Sub-Divisional Animal Husbandry Officer, Sadar Gaya, District- Gaya.
8. The Project Officer, Minor Animal Development Project H.Q. Level,
Nalanda District- Nalanda at Bih
9. The Sub-Divisional Animal Husbandry Officer, Patna Sadar, District- Patna.
... ... Respondents
======================================================
with
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 3378 of 2016
======================================================
1. Pramod Kumar Verma S/O Late Mukti Nath Prasad, At present working as
Technical Assistant in District Animal Husbandry Department at
Muzaffarpur
Patna High Court CWJC No.8669 of 2016(2) dt.23-03-2023
2/17
2. Ratanjay Kumar, S/o Late Surendra Prasad, At present working as Technical
Assistant in District Animal Husbandry Department at Muzaffarpur
3. Sunit Kumar S/o Sri Phulena Prasad, At present working as Technical
Assistant in District Animal Husbandry Department at Muzaffarpur
4. Anil Kumar Prasad S/o Sri Phulena Prasad, At present working as Technical
Assistant in District Animal Husbandry Department at Muzaffarpur
5. Sunil Kumar Mishra S/o Late Rajendra Prasad Mishra, At present working
as Technical Assistant in District Animal Husbandry Department at Siwan
... ... Petitioners
Versus
1. The State Of Bihar
2. The Commissioner-cum-Secretary, Department of Animal Husbandry and
Fisheries, New Secretariat, Patn
3. The Deputy Secretary, Department of Animal Husbandry and Fisheries, New
Secretariat, Patna
4. The Regional Joint Director, Patna
5. The Director, Department of Animal Husbandry, New Secretariat, Patna
6. The Regional Director, Patna
... ... Respondents
======================================================
with
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 8093 of 2018
======================================================
1. Mohammad Nasimuddin Son of Mohammad Salimuddin Resident of Village
and P.S. Sikandra ,District- Jamui.
2. Rajiv Kumar Son of Sri Gorakh Prasad Resident of Shastrinagar Colony,
P.O. Ramna, District- Muzaffarpur.
3. Mohammad Zia-ul-Haque Son of Mohammad Sairaj-ul-Haque Resident of
Village- Sapahi, P.O. Jhitkahi, P.S. Dhaka, District- East Champaran.
4. Surendra Paswan Son of Sri Keshwar Paswan Resident of Village-
Balanpatti Manjhaura, P.O. Lakshmipur, P.S. Laukaha, District- Madhubani.
5. Ramesh Kumar Son of Munishwar Sharma Resident of At and P.O.
Kharauna, District- Muzaffarpur.
... ... Petitioners
Versus
1. The State Of Bihar
2. The Secretary to Government, Department of Animal Husbandary,
Government of Bihar, New Secretariat,
3. Director Animal Husbandary, Government of Bihar, New Secretariat, Patna.
4. The Regional Director, Animal Husbandry, North Bihar Range, District-
Muzaffarpur.
Patna High Court CWJC No.8669 of 2016(2) dt.23-03-2023
3/17
... ... Respondents
======================================================
with
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 17016 of 2022
======================================================
Ramadhar Ram S/o Shri Naresh Ram Resident of Ward No.- 07, Bibi Ganj,
Vetenary Campus, P.O.- Bhagwanpur, District- Muzaffarpur- 842001, Bihar.
... ... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Commissioner-cum-Secretary, Department of
Animal Husbandry and Fishries, Government of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Commissioner-cum-Secretary, Department of Animal Husbandry and
Fishries, Government of Bihar, Patna.
3. The Deputy Secretary, Department of Animal Husbandry and Fishries,
Government of Bihar, Patna.
4. The Director (Animal Husbandry), Department of Animal Husbandry and
Fishries, Government of Bihar, Patna.
5. The Regional Director (North Bihar Range), Department of Animal
Husbandry and Fishries, Government of Bihar, Patna.
... ... Respondents
======================================================
with
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 17183 of 2022
======================================================
1. Lalan Kumar S/o Shri Balmiki Singh Resident of Ward No.- 14, Ranki
Singh Tola, Pansala, Bhairwar, District- Begusarai, Bihar.
2. Neeraj Kumar, S/o Shri Krishna Nandan Prasad Resident of Ward No.- 32,
Rajendra Nagar Gachi Tola, P.O.- Begusarai, Cheria Bariarpur, District-
Begusarai, Bihar.
3. Rupesh Kumar, S/o Shri Upendra Ray Resident of Village- Shokhara- 02,
Ward No.- 08, Near Gandhi Government Hospital, Makkhanshala Road,
P.O.- Barauni, District- Begusarai Sograha, Begusarai, Bihar.
4. Girish Kumar, S/o Late Brij Nanadan Prasad Sinha Resident of Ward No.-
43, Near Shiv Mandir, Bishnupur, Begusarai, Mohan Eghu, District-
Begusarai, Bihar.
... ... Petitioners
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Commissioner-cum-Secretary, Department of
Animal Husbandry and Fishries, Government of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Commissioner-cum-Secretary, Department of Animal Husbandry and
Fishries, Government of Bihar, Patna.
3. The Deputy Secretary, Department of Animal Husbandry and Fishries,
Government of Bihar, Patna.
4. The Director (Animal Husbandry), Department of Animal Husbandry and
Fishries, Government of Bihar, Patna.
Patna High Court CWJC No.8669 of 2016(2) dt.23-03-2023
4/17
5. The Regional Director (North Bihar Range), Department of Animal
Husbandry and Fishries, Government of Bihar, Barauni, Begusarai.
... ... Respondents
======================================================
with
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 4016 of 2023
======================================================
1. Dilip Kumar Son of Baldeo Prasad Resident of Mohalla- Sheikhpura,
Bagicha, P.S.- Shastri Nagar, P.O.- B.V. College, District- Patna.
2. Prabhakar Kumar, Son of Raghunandan Singh Resident of 46, VIP Nagar,
Barbagicha, Narayanpur, Behind Congress Office, Barbagicha, District-
Sheikhpura 811101.
3. Shailesh Kumar, Son of Late Balishth Prasad Singh Resident of 2M/18,
Bahadurpur, Housing Colony, Kanti Factory Road, Mahatama Gandhi
Nagar, Sampatchak, B.H. Colony, District- Patna 800026.
4. Ravindra Nath Thakur, Son of Sakaldeo Thakur Resident of 330/A, Nehru
Nagar, Boring Road, P.S. Patliputra, District- Patna.
5. Pratap Narayan Thakur, S/o Pushkar Pratap Resident of J43, P.C. Colony,
Kankarbagh, Patna, Sampatchak, Patna- 800020.
6. Shyam Ji, Son of Late Prahalad Singh Resident of Shiv Puram Lane No.-
1B, Vijay Nagar, Rukanpura, Bailey Road, B.V. College, Patna.
7. Sarwan Kumar, Son of Mahendra Prasad 162, Math Laxmanpur, Loiri Tola,
P.O.- Gulzarbagh, Sampatchak, Patna, Bihar- 800007.
... ... Petitioners
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Commissioner-cum-Secretary, Department of
Animal Husbandry and Fishries, Government of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Commissioner-cum-Secretary, Department of Animal Husbandry and
Fishries, Government of Bihar, Patna.
3. The Deputy Secretary, Department of Animal Husbandry and Fishries,
Government of Bihar, Patna.
4. The Director (Animal Husbandry), Department of Animal Husbandry and
Fishries, Government of Bihar, Patna.
5. The Regional Director (North Bihar Range), Department of Animal
Husbandry and Fishries, Government of Bihar, Patna.
... ... Respondents
======================================================
Appearance :
(In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 8669 of 2016)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Nikhil Kumar Agarwal, Advocate
Mr. Vijay Kumar Singh, Advocate
Ms.Aditi Hansaria, Advocate
Mr. Yash Sahay, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Arvind Ujjwal, SC25
(In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 3378 of 2016)
Patna High Court CWJC No.8669 of 2016(2) dt.23-03-2023
5/17
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Rajeev Kumar Singh, Advocate
Mr.Gyanendra Kr. Diwakar, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Nishant Kumar Jha, AC to SC-28
(In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 8093 of 2018)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Manoj Kumar Ambastha, Advocate
Mr.Nikhil Kumar Agarwal, Advocate
Ms.Aditi Hansaria, Advocate
Mr. Yash Sahay, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Raj Kishore Roy -GP18
Ms.Surekha Kumari, AC to GP-18
(In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 17016 of 2022)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Nikhil Kumar Agrawal, Advocate
Ms.Aditi Hansaria, Advocate
Mr. Yash Sahay, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Rishi Raj Sinha, SC19
(In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 17183 of 2022)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Nikhil Kumar Agrawal, Advocate
Mr.Rajiv Singh, Advocate
Ms.Aditi Hansaria, Advocate
Mr. Yash Sahay, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Sajid Salim Khan, SC-25
Ms.Prakritita Sharma, AC to SC-25
(In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 4016 of 2023)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Nikhil Kumar Agrawal, Advocate
Ms.Aditi Hansaria, Advocate
Mr. Yash Sahay, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Md. Khurshid Alam, AAG-12
Mr.Shailendra Kumar Dwivedi, AC to AAG-12
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD
ORAL ORDER
2 23-03-2023All these writ applications have been listed together on the mentioning made by the learned counsel for the petitioners saying that these cases are covered by the Hon'ble Division Bench Judgment dated 28.02.2023 passed in LPA No. 1344 of 2018 (arising out of CWJC No. 4224 of 2017) (Ashwani Kumar & Ors. Vs. the State of Bihar and Others).
2. Learned counsel for the State in different writ applications have opposed these writ petitions on various grounds however, in course of hearing of the writ petitions when it was contended on behalf of the State that the Hon'ble Patna High Court CWJC No.8669 of 2016(2) dt.23-03-2023 6/17 Division Bench in Ashwani Kumar's case has not followed the principles of stare decisis and held Hon'ble Full Bench Judgment of this Court in the case of Sri Shashibhushan Kumar Vs. The State of Bihar and Others (CWJC No. 12904 of 1996) per-incuriam, this Court is constrained to consider as to whether these matters require consideration by a larger Bench.
Brief facts
3. The petitioners in these writ applications were appointed as Technical Assistant on adhoc basis by the then Regional Director, Animal Husbandry, South Chhotanagpur, Ranchi. They were appointed for a period of 6 months whereafter their services were extended from time to time. In the year 1991-1992, the services of the petitioners were finally regularized. In CWJC No. 8869 of 2016 a copy of the regularization order has been brought on record as Annexure '7'. For a ready reference one of the regularization order is being reproduced hereunder:-
"aaAA dk;kZy;] {ks=h; funs"kd] Ik"kqikyu] dsUnzh; {ks=] iVukA AA vkns"k AA 51 osrueku&535&765@&:0 esa iwoZ ls fu;qDr Jh lq/kka"kq dqekj] Ik"kq/ku lgk;d izkUrh;d`r i"kq fpfdRlky;] ckWdhiqj dks 240 fnuksa dh lsok iwjh djus ds QyLo:i iape osru iqujhf{kr osrueku 975&25&1150&30&1540 :0 esa vxys vkns"k rd lsok fu;fer fd;k tkrk gSAa ;g vkns"k fcYdqy vLFkkbZ gS ,oa fcuk dkj.k n"kkZ; bls jnn fd;k tk ldrk gSA Patna High Court CWJC No.8669 of 2016(2) dt.23-03-2023 7/17 g0@& ts0ih0oekZ {ks=h; funs"kd] Ik"kqikyu dsUnzh; {ks=] iVuk Kkikad%& 174 i0 ik0 iVuk& 14] fnukad 30-12-90 izfrfyfi Ik"kq "kY; fpfdRld] ckWdhiqj ,oa Jh lq/kka"kq dqekj i"kq/ku lgk;d dks lqpukFkZ ,oa izsf'krA g0@& vLi'V 31-12-90 {ks=h; funs"kd] Ik"kqikyu dsUnzh; {ks=] iVuk "
4. It is the case of the petitioners that the Regional Director of the Department was having power to make appointments against the sanctioned and vacant posts of Technical Assistant and he had published a notice on the Notice Board. The petitioners have not brought on record any copy of such notice on the record which is said to have been pasted on the Notice Board.
5. It is further stated that the power given to the Regional Director of the Department to exercise the function of the Director was withdrawn vide memo no. 869 dated 05.02.1991 issued under the signature of Secretary of the Department (Annexure '8') but because the petitioners were appointed prior to 05.02.1991, their appointments were legal and valid in all respect.
6. It is stated that in the year 1998, vide memo no. 5530 dated 23.10.1998 (Annexure '9') directions were issued to the Regional Directors to serve the show cause notices upon the Patna High Court CWJC No.8669 of 2016(2) dt.23-03-2023 8/17 Technical Assistants as to why their appointments/promotions be not cancelled. The petitioners filed writ applications before this Court in CWJC No. 9670 of 1998 and CWJC No. 9963 of 1998 wherein initially vide order dated 16.11.1998 the Department was restrained from removing the petitioners from services. It is stated that later on as the service of the petitioners were regularized, they withdrew the writ petitions. It is stated that a large number of cases of similar nature were filed in this Court and those were ultimately referred to the Full Bench of this Court. On perusal of the order dated 16.11.1998 passed in CWJC No. 9670 of 1998 (Dilip Kumar & Ors. Vs. State of Bihar and Others) it would appear that the writ application was ordered to be tagged with CWJC No. 10491 and CWJC No. 3321 of 1997. Later on, when CWJC No. 9670 of 1998, CWJC No. 9963 of 1998 and CWJC No. 2909 of 2000 were listed before the Hon'ble Full Bench, those writ applications were sought to be withdrawn by conceding that no cause of action has arisen. The order dated 10.11.2014 of the Hon'ble Full Bench reads as under:-
"Learned Advocate Mr. Satish Kumar has appeared for the writ petitioners. He concedes that no cause of action arisen. He seeks leave to withdraw writ petitions.
Leave is granted.
Petitions are disposed of as withdrawn. Interim relief, if any, shall stand vacated."
Patna High Court CWJC No.8669 of 2016(2) dt.23-03-2023 9/17
7. It appears that CWJC No. 12904/1996 and other analogous matters arose out of identical kind of appointments made by the then Director in Animal Husbandry Department of the State of Bihar against Class-III service in Intensive Artificial Insemination Programme. The appointments were made without any authority of law and directions were issued by the State Government to the Regional Directors of the Animal Husbandry to take steps to terminate the service of each such persons. The consequential action of termination of service was taken which were challenged in the writ petitions.
8. While going through the records as this Court could sense some foul play, this Court called upon learned counsel for the petitioners and the State to find out as to whether the appellants of the Letters Patent Appeal No. 1344 of 2018 had also come to this Court on the earlier occasion, this Court has been informed that all the three appellants of LPA No. 1344 of 2018 were the petitioners in CWJC No. 7214 of 1997. This writ petition was also the subject matter of consideration before the Hon'ble Full Bench in the batch of cases which were tagged with CWJC No. 12904 of 1996.
9. The Hon'ble Full Bench vide it's judgment dated 25.11.2014 held that the Class-III posts under the Regional Patna High Court CWJC No.8669 of 2016(2) dt.23-03-2023 10/17 Director were the State cadre posts and consequent upon the instructions issued on 20th April, 1981, the power to make appointment on such posts were vested in the State. It was further held that for the purpose of selection, the State Government had established the Bihar State Sub-ordinate Service Selection Board and the power of selection was exclusively vested in the said Board and the authority. Admittedly, the writ petitioners in the cases before the Hon'ble Full Bench were appointed after 20th April, 1981, they had not undergone the due selection procedure, therefore, it was held that not one appointment was legal and valid. The operative part of the judgment of the Hon'ble Full Bench in CWJC No. 12904 of 1996 (Sri Shashibhushan Kumar and Others vs. The State of Bihar and Others) and other analogous matters are being reproduced hereunder :-
"These are the basic facts and contentions raised before us. We need not delve into the matter further since the matter has already been set at rest by the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the matter of State of Bihar Vs. Upendra Narayan Singh [(2009) 5 SCC 65]. In the said matter an identical issue was raised in respect of the appointment of the respondent Upendra Narain Singh made by the Regional Director of Animal Husbandry. The Hon‟ble Judges have discussed the right to equality enshrined under Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution. The learned Judges of the Hon‟ble Patna High Court CWJC No.8669 of 2016(2) dt.23-03-2023 11/17 Supreme Court have relied upon "Framing of India's Constitution Volume II, edited by B. Shiva Rao" and the parliamentary discussions. The Hon‟ble Court has held, "The basic principle which, therefore, informs both Articles 14 and 16 is equality and inhibition against discrimination". After extensive discussion on the basic principle and plethora of judgments on the issue, the Hon‟ble Court has upheld the action of the State Government. The Hon‟ble Court dismissed the arguments based on right to life protected under Article 21 of the Constitution.
In view of the aforesaid judgment of the Hon‟ble Supreme Court, the binding precedent, I have but to uphold the action of the State Government. Let me assume for a moment that the Regional Director of Animal Husbandry was empowered to make appointment of Class III ministerial staff and Class IV staff under him. Even in that case, was the Regional Director justified in making the appointments in the manner in which he made the appointments. The power has to be exercised in the manner in which it is directed to be exercised. Even under 1966 delegation of power, the Regional Director was not empowered to make appointments indiscriminately, at his will or without following due process of selection.
In the present case, each petitioner was initially appointed as a casual worker. After serving for a year or so, each writ petitioner was regularised in Class III service on the pretext that each petitioner had rendered 'long service'. Evidently, the appointment of the petitioners was made contrary to all canons of service jurisprudence. Admittedly, the Regional Director had not invited applications by public notice. None of the petitioners had to face competition. They were offered the employment on a platter without following due Patna High Court CWJC No.8669 of 2016(2) dt.23-03-2023 12/17 process of law. The appointment of the writ petitioners was ex facie bad and illegal and untenable. The judgments of the Hon‟ble Supreme court in the matter of Uma Devi (supra) or M. L. Keshri (supra) cannot be pressed into service to regularise totally illegal service of the writ petitioners. Time and again the Hon‟ble Supreme Court has deprecated the illegal appointments made in the State service by adopting dubious measures and the act of regularization of such dubious appointments.
In my view, the appointment of the writ petitioners was totally illegal and arbitrary, the least that the State Government could do is to get rid of such employees appointed on extraneous consideration in utter disregard of the principle of equality enshrined in Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution.
For the aforesaid reasons, the writ petitions and the appeal are dismissed.
Interim reliefs, if any, stand vacated."
10. CWJC No. 7214 of 1997 was also one of the cases disposed off vide common judgment dated 25.11.2014 passed by Hon'ble Full Bench.
11. It appears that after the judgment of the Hon'ble Full Bench, the Department/Directorate was sleeping in deep slumber and no action was being taken. The then Secretary, Animal & Husbandry Resources Department, Government of Bihar wrote a D.O. Letter (Annexure '12') to the Director, Animal Husbandry, in which he pointed out that despite the several orders passed by this Court in different writ applications, Patna High Court CWJC No.8669 of 2016(2) dt.23-03-2023 13/17 no consequential action is being taken by the Animal Husbandry Directorate which shows their involvement. The Secretary wrote for identifying those officers and the employees who are responsible for this inaction. At the same time, he directed for taking an appropriate steps for compliance with the judgment of the court.
12. The D.O. Letter of the Secretary of the Department (Annexure '12') resulted in the action impugned in the present writ application. It appears vide Memo No. 217 dated 29.01.2016, the services of altogether 90 persons have been terminated.
13. The appellants of LPA No. 1344/2018 namely, Ashwani Kumar, Ranjan Kumar and Randhir Roy are placed at serial nos. 6, 7 and 9 respectively in the impugned Memo No. 217 dated 29.01.2016 (Annexure '13' to the writ application).
14. Since the persons named at serial nos. 6, 7 and 9 respectively have succeeded in LPA No. 1344/2018, the submission of learned counsel for the petitioners in all these writ applications is that they being similarly situated are liable to be dealt with equally and their writ applications are also fit to be allowed.
Patna High Court CWJC No.8669 of 2016(2) dt.23-03-2023 14/17 Submissions of the State
15. Learned counsel for the State submitted that these appointments were made without any advertisement in newspaper and without following established procedure of law. The Division Bench in LPA No. 1344 of 2018 has gone to the extent of saying that the Hon'ble Full Bench judgment in case of Sri Shashibhushan Kumar Vs. The State of Bihar and others (CWJC No. 12904 of 1996) is per incuriam to the case in hand, perhaps for the reason that the Hon'ble Division Bench was not informed of a very vital fact that the very appellants who were before the Hon'ble Division Bench are bound by the judgment of the Hon'ble Full Bench inasmuch as their writ application being CWJC No. 7214 of 1997 was one of the writ applications which had fallen for consideration before the Hon'ble Full Bench.
16. Learned counsel for the State also points out that instead of informing the Hon'ble Division Bench that the appellants before the Bench were parties to the Full Bench judgment and their appointments have been held illegal, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners in the said case went on to argue that the principles laid down in the earlier Full Bench judgment in the case of State of Bihar versus Upendra Patna High Court CWJC No.8669 of 2016(2) dt.23-03-2023 15/17 Narayan Singh and others reported in (2009) 5 SCC 65 are not attracted to the case in hand. This submission was wholly contrary to the finding of the Hon'ble Full Bench in it's judgment dated 25.11.2014 that the issue involved in those cases had been set at rest by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of Upendra Narain Singh (Supra).
17. It is further submitted that a distinction was tried to be drawn in the LPA No. 1344 of 2018 (Ashwini Kumar and Others versus State of Bihar and Others) by arguing that the learned Single Judge had committed an error in rejecting the writ petition and the Hon'ble Division Bench accepted the submission by holding that the Upendra Narain Singh case is distinguishable both on factual aspects as well as on applicability of Uma Devi decision, paragraph '53' whereof has been relied upon. It is, thus, submitted that the Hon'ble Division Bench judgment in LPA No. 1344 of 2018 is, in fact, directly overruling the Hon'ble Full Bench judgment in case of Sri Shashibhushan Kumar Vs. the State of Bihar and others and other analogous matters.
18. At this stage, this Court having noticed that Mr. Md. Khurshid Alam, learned AAG-12 had appeared for the State and he is again appearing in one of the writ applications tagged Patna High Court CWJC No.8669 of 2016(2) dt.23-03-2023 16/17 with this batch of cases called upon him to clarify as to whether or not it is correct that the appellants in CWJC No. 1344 of 2018 were parties to the Hon'ble Full Bench Judgment dated 25.11.2014. Learned AAG-12 admits that they were parties to the said Full Bench judgment.
19. This Court has heard learned counsel for the parties. It is noticed that even in the present batch of writ petitions there are petitioners who had earlier come to this court and their cases were decided by the Hon'ble Full Bench. For example, the petitioners in CWJC No. 8093/2018 were petitioners in CWJC No. 9389 of 1998.
20. Having noticed the kind of submissions hereinabove and one of them is that the Hon'ble Division Bench judgment in LPA No. 1344 of 2018, holding the Full Bench judgment per-incuriam would amount to overruling the judgment of the Hon'ble Full Bench in case of Sri Shashibhushan Kumar and other analogous matters (Supra), this Court is of the considered opinion that this matter is required to be heard by a larger Bench.
21. Let the entire records be placed at the earliest before Hon'ble the Chief Justice for consideration and listing before appropriate Bench.
Patna High Court CWJC No.8669 of 2016(2) dt.23-03-2023 17/17
22. It will be open for the Principal Secretary/ Secretary, Department of Animal Husbandry, Government of Bihar to proceed with his action towards identifying the responsible officers and employees who did not act pursuant to the Hon'ble Full Bench judgment of this Court for years together and kept on bestowing public money on the appointees whose appointments were already held illegal by the Hon'ble Full Bench. The Principal Secretary shall complete the entire exercise in this regard at the earliest and preferably within a period of three months from the date of communication of this order and shall report to this Court.
(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J) Rajeev/sushma-
U