SHAILENDRA KUMAR THAKUR Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard counsel for the parties.

(2.) This writ application is directed against the order, as contained in annexure 10 dated 3.2.1997, issued under the signature of the Deputy Director, Secondary Education, Government of Bihar, Patna, whereby and whereunder the petitioner has been terminated.

(3.) It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that initially, the petitioner was appointed as part time instructor in the year 1988 in Zila School, Motihai after following the procedures of appointment and thereafter he was appointed as Assistant Teacher in the same school by the order of the Regional Deputy Director of Education on a vacant post with effect from 20th March, 1990 and while the petitioner was functioning on the post of Assistant Teacher his appointment was cancelled vide order dated 16.2.1991, which subsequently was recalled vide letter dated 11.11.1991 and thereafter the petitioner continued and now by the impugned order dated 3.2.1997 he has been terminated on the basis of certain directions issued by this Court in CWJC No. 11913 of 1992, as contained in Annexure 9, Dr. Jha, learned senior counsel, further submitted that the order passed by this Court, as contained in Annexure 9, was challenged in this Court in LPA No. 297 of 1997, which, ultimately, was allowed vide order dated 22.7.2003, as contained in Annexure 11, setting aside the order passed by the learned single Judge in CWJC No. 10404 of 1995. Learned counsel, therefore, submitted that in view of the order passed by this Court in Letters Patent Appeal, as referred to above, the whole basis for termination of the services of the petitioner became non-existent, and, therefore, the order impugned is liable to be set aside.