SAILESHKAMARSINGH Vs. HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) What are the contours and ambit of the judicial review against an order dated 4-6-1994 (Annexure 5) passed by the then Hon'ble the Chief Justice of the Patna High Court (Hon'ble K. S. Paripoornan) directing literate Mazdoors (daily wages) to be appointed against Class III posts of Assistant, Translator and Typist on ad-hoc basis, provided they had requisite qualification of a Graduate, and the orders granting extension of service for a period of one year to Shri Nagendra Ojha, Principal Private Secretary to Hon'ble the Chief Justice, Shri H. K. Nandkeolyar, Assistant Registrar and Shri Md. Samiullha, Secretary to Hon'ble Judge, after they attained the age of superannuation, under the Proviso added to rule 73 of the Bihar Service Code, 1952, the rules framed by the Hon'ble Chief justice in exercise of his power under Article 229 of the Constitution of India, and as to whether the present writ petition at the behest of an Advocate of this Court, as Public Interest Litigation is maintainable ?

(2.) The factual matrix of the case is that the petitioner is an Advocate practising in this Court and he has filed this petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India as a "Public Interest Litigation" (P.I.L. for short) The petitioner has claimed relief that the orders passed by the then Hon'ble Chief Justice appointing ^iterate Mazdoors (daily wages) to the posts of Assistant, Translator, Typist etc. on ad-hoc basis, provided they have requisite qualifications, and granting extension to the aforesaid three employees of this Court, be quashed by issuing a writ of certiorari and a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to ensure proper functioning of the Patna High Court, as the working has been substantially paralysed, due to the members of the Ministerial Staff Association, Judgment Writers' Association and the Class-IV Employees of the Patna High Court having gone on strike since the 7th of July, 1994, as their demands for withdrawal of the orders of the then Hon'ble the Chief Justice were not accepted by the present Hon'ble the Chief Justice (Hon'ble Kundaswami Venkataswami), and a direction be given to the Registrar General of this Court (respondens No. 2) to direct the employees to withdraw the strike and resume their work.

(3.) The aforesaid Employees Associations held general meeting on the 23rd of July, 1994 at 1.30 P.M. and considered the extension granted to the aforesaid three employees and the appointments of Assistant Translators Typists as literate Mazdoors on ad hoc basis, provided they were qualified. The grievance of the said Employees Associations was also against officiation of Shri Digree Singh, Deputy Secretary to the Hon'ble the Chief Justice, whereas he holds the post of Translator. The Employees Associations raised their demands before the present Hon'ble the Chief Justice to concede to their demands before the 5th of July, 1994, failing which they shall go on strike for an indefinite period from the 7th of July, 1994. As the demands of the employees were not conceeded, hence they proceeded on indefinite strike, as a consequence the working of the High Court has been substantially paralysed on account of the absence of the members of the Employees Associations, who were working on different posts. As the strike since the 7th of July, 1994 was not withdrawn, the present writ petition was filed as P.I.L. on the 22nd of July, 1994.