STATE OF BIHAR Vs. RAJ NARAYAN PODDAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned Counsel for the parties. Limitation, in filing of these appeals, is in issue in this batch of appeals, which have been preferred by the State of Bihar, as an appellant, seeking condonation of delay in filing these appeals.

(2.) In the year 2009, over 400 appeals were preferred against the orders of a learned Single Judge of this Court, quashing the order of termination and enquiry report made in December, 2008, of the employees of Class III and IV of Department of Health, Government of Bihar, whose appointments were either categorized as illegal or forged. The contention of the appellants is that the delay, in filing the appeals, is not on account of any dilatory tactics, want of bona fides, deliberate inaction or negligence on the part of the appellants, but the same is on account of bona fide misconstruction and misunderstanding of the matter inasmuch as judgments were kept reserved in many of the appeals preferred against the order of the learned Single Judge and, in some of the State appeals, even the order of learned Single Judge, setting aside the order of termination, has been stayed. Furthermore, quite a number of appeals, preferred by the State, have been referred, with the consent of employees, to one man Committee of Justice Uday Sinha, a retired Judge of this Court. The appellants state that the delay, in filing of a large number of appeals against the order of the learned Single Judge, has been condoned by different Benches.

(3.) Before we deal with the issue, some facts are required to be noticed. A large number of illegal appointments on different Class-III and IV posts, in Health Department, came to light in the year 1999. Most of these appointments were made in late 1980s and after providing them with notices to show cause, their services were terminated between 2001 and 2003 on the ground that their appointments were illegal and forged. A large number of writ petitions came to be filed against order of termination including a writ petition, which gave rise to C.W.J.C. No. 4702 of 2003. In the said writ petition and also in some other writ petitions, which were heard analogously, a learned Single Judge of this Court allowed the writ petitions, by order, dated 8.9.2003, primarily, on the ground that the employees had remained in service for a long period of time. Being aggrieved, the State preferred a number of appeals bearing L.P.A. No. 946 of 2003 and analogous appeals. The appeals preferred by the State, as well as the writ petitions of the employees, challenging the orders of termination, which had not been taken up for hearing earlier, were heard together by a Division Bench of this Court.