DEO KANT CHOUDHARY Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) The petitioners are daily wage employees, making a prayer for quashing the orders contained in memo nos. 569 dated 28.01.2011, memo no.519 dated 19.01.2011, memo no.419 dated 26.10.2010, memo no.517 dated 19.01.2011 and memo no.538 dated 22.01.2011, which have been passed in pursuance of the order passed in different writ petition viz. C.W.J.C. No.17234 of 2011, 17474 of 2010, 11032 of 1998 and other analogous cases as well as C.W.J.C. No. 17315 of 2010, 4171 of 1999 and other analogous cases, thereby the representations of the petitioners have been rejected.

(3.) The short facts of this case are that the petitioners were appointed as daily wage employees in the Bihar School Examination Board and they have continued to discharge their duties, but a decision was taken vide Annexure-6 to terminate the services of all daily wages employees and in pursuance thereof, the petitioners along with other daily wager employees were terminated with effect from 21.07.1989. Whereafter, an advertisement dated 14.09.1989 was published for recruitment and appointment of class-III and IV posts, which was challenged by the petitioners in C.W.J.C. No.8440 of 1989, but this Court had refused to grant the benefit and directed the Board to accept their application provisionally with the condition that the petitioners would produce their requisition certificate within the employment exchange within a fortnight from the date of passing of the order. While disposing of the writ petition, the Court had directed the respondents to grant relaxation of age with respect to the eligibility of their appearance in the said examination. In pursuance thereof, the examination was conducted, in which the petitioners and others have appeared, they were declared successful along with others, but the authority did not grant any appointment letter to Class-III and IV employees, which compelled them to approach this Court in C.W.J.C. No. 750 of 1999 and other analogous cases, in which they have taken a plea that though the advertisement was published for appointment of Class-III and IV employees, at the same time, the selection process for appointment of Drivers and Stenos was also started. After the result, the Stenos and Drivers were appointed by the Board, but the petitioners were not appointed. The Court has considered the matter in the light of the report submitted by the Committee constituted by the Court. The said Committee gave its finding that the work of the Board has decreased as well as the Bihar Intermediate Council has already been abolished and their employees has to be adjusted in the Board, additionally recorded that the Board is suffering from over-staffs and as such, the question of granting the appointment letter to the selected candidates of Class III and IV does not arise and finally the Court has refused to issue the mandamus. It will be useful to quote relevant paragraphs of the said judgment, which are as follows:-