NAYAN KUMAR MUNSHI Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned Counsel for the Petitioner and learned Counsel for the Respondents.

(2.) Petitioner has challenged Annexure-1 dated 6.2.2001 by which the Principal has terminated the services of the Petitioner with effect from 1.5.1998.

(3.) Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that in view of exigencies of the situation the Principal invited applications on 12.5.1989 for appointment on Class-Ill and IV posts on daily wages. Petitioner and others applied and they were engaged. He continued in the college as daily wager. However, since November, 1986 Petitioner's wages were stopped. Hence, he moved this Court through C.W.J.C. No. 7584 of 1998. The said writ application was disposed of by order dated 28.1.2000, a copy whereof is annexed as Annexure-13. The order shows that the University had taken stand in the said writ application that Petitioner's engagement was ab initio void as the same had been made by the Principal without sanction of post, without advertisement and without following the procedure for selection. It was also pointed out that the State Government had issued instructions for disengagement of such illegally appointed persons. This Court noticed that it was not in dispute that the engagement of the Petitioner was on daily wage basis and as a measure of stop gap arrangement. Therefore, strict rule of procedure for regular appointment was not required to be followed. However, it also noticed that the State Government had issued directions for disengaging the daily wage employees and, therefore, "it was well within the purview of the University to disengage such daily wage employees including the Petitioner". But the Court found that there was nothing on record to suggest that any formal order was issued by the University to disengage the Petitioner from daily wage. Therefore, this Court held that the Petitioner was entitled for his wages for the period he had actually performed his duty.