AKHILESH KUMAR SINHA Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned Counsel for the petitioners and learned G.P. 9 for the respondent in all the cases.

(2.) ALL these writ applications have been filed for common cause as the writ petitioners have been terminated from their services and the facts involved in these writ applications are identical, therefore, they have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common order.

(3.) IT is almost settled that if an employee continued on a post for several years, his services should not be terminated. In this connection, reference may be made to the case of Roshni Devi and Ors. v. State of Haryana and Ors. and also the case of Union of India and Ors. v. Kishorilal Bablani In these cases, it appears that even though certain irregularities were found in appointment of the petitioners the authorities by now acquiesced in the infirmities and now appointment of the petitioners cannot be said to be violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution. Moreover by now all the petitioners have become overage and in case orders of termination are not interfered with, they will not get employment anywhere.