RAMESH PRASAD Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned Counsel for the parties.

(2.) Vide order dated 30.6.2003 contained in Annexure-7, the Petitioner alongwith many other constables appointed at a different time frame came to be dismissed from service. The dismissal order states in all the cases that the concerned persons were not appointed on the post of constable by following due procedure. It is in this background the Petitioner has filed this writ application since even his appeal came to be rejected vide order contained in Annexure-10.

(3.) Submission in the writ application is that the order of dismissal has come to be passed without following any procedure or a finding recorded in this regard that the appointment of the Petitioner was for extraneous reason or not following the procedure as has been stated in Annexure-7.