ASHWANI KUMAR Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Leave granted in S.L P. (C) Nos. 6174 of 1992, 14275 of 1994, 7410 of 1995 and S. L. P. (C) No. 24553 (CC 4638/95).

(2.) This group of appeals, on grant of special leave to appeal against the common judgment of Patna High Court in CWJC No. 5163 of 1993 and batch decided on 6th May 1994, has been placed before this larger Bench by the orders of Honble the Chief Justice on account of difference of opinion between two learned judges of this Court, K. Ramaswamy J. and Hansaria, J., constituting the Division Bench which earlier heard this group of matters. Before the main points for difference are highlighted and the contentions of respective contesting parties are noted, it would be necessary to note at the outset the backdrop facts leading to these proceedings. Backdrop Facts

(3.) One Dr. A.A. Mallick, Deputy Director, Health Department of the Government of Bihar, was in charge of Tuberculosis for a number of years while he was working as a member of the medical service of the State of Bihar. He was Director of the Tuberculosis Centre at Patna. Eradication of Tuberculosis was taken up as a part of 20-Point Programme in planned expenditure. The activities in the Tuberculosis Centre at Patna were extended to various districts. Since Dr. Mallick happened to be the Director of the Centre, he was made Deputy Director of the Scheme. The Government had also issued directions to the District Medical Officers to abide by the instructions of Dr. Mallick in implementation of the programme. He was made the Chairman of Selection Committee constituted by the Government consisting of himself, Assistant Director of Pilaria and a senior officer representing Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes to recruit 2250 III and Class IV employees on posts created to implement the Scheme in addition to around 800 to 900 staff in Patna Centre in all categories. Taking advantage thereof, the undisputed fact is that, he appointed around 6000 (as found by the Committee) while the Government asserts them to be approximately 7000. Be that as it may, not less than 6000 persons were appointed by Dr. Mallick without any written orders. He directed many of them to be adjusted by transfer by District Medical Officers and some of them had produced fabricated appointment orders. He shuffled their payment of salaries by turns. Another device adopted in the macabre episode was to make the employees go on strike and when some sensitive M. L. As., raised the question, on the floor of the State Legislative Assembly, of illegal appointments made by Dr. Mallick, the Government initially posed the appointments to be legal and justified his action to be valid. Later, when facts themselves proved their faulty admission, they made amends before the assembly and the Government made an elaborate statement apprising the House that the information furnished earlier was not correct.