ANJANI KUMAR MISHRA Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This review petition has been preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India in respect of an order passed on 4 -2 -2002 by the Hon'ble Mr. Justice S.J. Mukhopadhyaya, as he then was in this High Court in C.W.J.C. No. 8000/93.

(2.) The present petitioner, Anjani Kumar Mishra was respondent No. 6 in the original writ petition. Five persons filed the above -mentioned writ petition challengr ing the appointment of respondents 5 to 9 on the ground that they were appointed without following the process of selection. All the private respondents had contested the writ petition and after adjudication it was directed to the official respondents to remove respondents 5 and 6 from the post of Clerk, if no formal order of termination is issued till date. Such order should be issued on an earlier date but not later on a period of a month from the date of receipt/production of the copy of the order. In respect of the present petitioner, it was held in the following manner in the writ petition itself: So far as respondent No. 6 is concerned, he has appeared, but failed to show that he competed in the typing test. Thereby it can be safely stated that the appointment of respondent No. 6 was made without following the procedure.... and consequence to such finding the order of termination was directed. But in the counter -affidavit filed by respondent No. 6, it was contended that respondent No. 6, this present petitioner in this review petition was practically a retrenched employee and he was purely appointed on temporary basis on the basis of a local advertisement which was approved by the District Establishment Committee in its meeting dated 15 -7 -1988. It was further stated that the services of respondent No. 6 was regularised by the order of the State Government as contained in Memo No. 882 dated 29 -11 -1988 of the Director, Secondary Education on his being a retrenched employee. The order of regularisation was also annexed to the counter -affidavit as Annexure -5.

(3.) On previous occasion in C.W.J.C. No. 5188/89, appointment of this petitioner, Anjani Kumar Mishra along with three others, who were arrayed as respondent Nos. 5 to 8 in the original writ petition was quashed. They preferred Civil Review No. 67/94 and Civil Review No. 69/94 for review of the judgment passed in C.W.J.C. No. 5188/89 and the same were pending and were admitted for hearing.