LAWS(PAT)-2020-1-56

MITHILESH KUMAR JHA Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

Decided On January 21, 2020
MITHILESH KUMAR JHA Appellant
V/S
STATE OF BIHAR Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Letters Patent Appeal has been filed against the judgment and order dated 10.09.2014 passed by the learned single Judge in CWJC No. 13336 of 2010 whereby the writ petition filed by the appellant for quashing the order contained in Memo No. 532(4) dated 31.03.2010 issued by the Director-in-Chief, Health Services, Bihar, Patna whereby the order as contained in memo No. 22 dated 25.01.2008 passed by the Civil Surgeon-cum-Chief Medical Officer, Madhubani (for short 'CMO, Madhubani') terminating the service of the appellant from the post of clerk was affirmed has been dismissed.

(2.) The matter at issue is simple. However, it has a long chequered history.

(3.) The case of the appellant is that an advertisement for appointment on posts of clerk was issued by the CMO, Madhubani in the daily newspaper 'Hindustan Times' on 14.09.1989. Since he fulfilled all the eligibility criteria, he applied for the aforesaid appointment. He appeared in the written test and was declared successful following which an interview was held and merit list was prepared and he was selected for the aforesaid post. Following his selection, an appointment letter was issued in his favour vide Memo No. 2905 dated 31.12.1989 by the CMO, Madhubani by which he was posted at the Additional Primary Health Centre, Mahrail, Andhrathari, Madhubani. He submitted his joining on 01.01.1990 at the place of posting. He was transferred to the Sub- Divisional Hospital, Jhanjharpur on 30.11.2004. Though he was regularly performing his duty and was granted the benefit of first accelerated career progression, a show cause notice was issued to him vide Memo No. 3261 dated 28.12.2007 by the CMO, Madhubani by which he was directed to provide certain documents by 15.01.2008 to ascertain the legality of his appointment. He filed reply to the show cause on 08.01.2008 whereby he submitted that his appointment was in accordance with law and his matter of appointment should be considered sympathetically and he should be permitted to continue in service. However, ignoring his reply to the show cause notice, he has been removed from service vide Memo No. 227 dated 25.01.2008 issued by the CMO, Madhubani.