SATISH KUMAR Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition on behalf of five petitioners is directed against the order as contained in Memo No. 1208 (22) dated 18.11.95 of the Directorate of Health, Government of Bihar, by which their services have been terminated. The facts of the case briefly stated are as follows.

(2.) THE Bihar State Sub ordinate Services Selection Board (in short, Board) invited applications for appointment to the post of Assistant vide Adv. No. 6/85, better known as Second Graduate Standard Assistants Examination 1985. The petitioners claim to have applied pursuant to the said advertisement and appeared at the written examination held for the purpose on 27th and 28th December 1986. Before the results could be finalised the Board was dissolved. Writ petitions being CWJC No. 4392/91 and CWJC No. 1412/92 were filed seeking suitable directions upon the respondents to take steps for appointment on the basis of said examination. Pursuant to the order passed in those writ petitions as well as MJC No. 242/93 arising there from, the Bihar Public Service Commission (in short, Commission), which had taken over the left over work of the Board, took the follow up steps. As the records of the Board were found to be in disarray the Commission by notice dated 6.7.93 asked the candidates who had appeared at the examination to submit second i.e. duplicate application. The petitioners claim to have submitted applications pursuant to the said notice. Finally on 30.11.93 the Commission recommended the names of 268 persons including those of the petitioners for appointment. The Health Department apparently in order to satisfy it self about the genuineness of candidature of the recommended candidates called upon them to furnish their papers for the purpose of verification by a Committee. Between 27.12.93 and 31.12.93 the verification of certificate etc. was made in course of interview. Ultimately on 14.2.94 the recommended candidates including the petitioners were issued appointment letters and they joined their respective posts.

(3.) IN the mean time the Commission had issued a show cause notice to the petitioners on 8.1.96 and upon consideration of the show cause filed by them issued order on 5.5.97 debarring them from all future examinations to be held by the Commission. It may not be out of place to mention here that in respect of one such person against whom also similar action had been taken namely Ratnesh Kumar, the Commission later retracted from its stand and decided to re -send the recommendation. Ratnesh Kumar who had also moved this Court in CWJC No. 5194/96 at about the same time has since been reinstated in service.