STATE OF BIHAR; PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT; PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND ADMINISTRATIVE REFORMS; RANBIR KUMAR RAMAN; SUSHIL KUMAR SINGH; SHIV KUMAR MANDAL; SIKANDAR PRASAD YADAV; KESHAV KUMAR SINGH; Vs. ANITA KUMARI; SABITA KUMARI; USHA KUMARI; SUNIL KUMAR; SHEO BHAJAN PRASAD DIWAKAR; DHARMENDRA KUMAR KAUSHIK; ARUN KUMAR SINHA; ANIL KUMAR SINGH; AYODHYA PRASAD; SHRIKANT PANDEY; MUNNA KUMAR; SURESH PRASAD; MANJU KUMARI; ARUN CHOUDHARY; BANARAS CHOUDHARY;

JUDGEMENT

(1.) All these cases are inter-linked with the fate of judgment of learned Single Judge in the case of Sheo Bhajan Prasad Diwakar and others Versus State of Bihar and others being C.W.J.C. No. 8418/2010 decided on 21.04.2011.

(2.) The question is, whether the State could legitimately distinguish and differentiate between the retrenched Non-Formal Supervisors and Non-Formal Instructors as a consequence of closure of the scheme in the State. The former i.e. Non-Formal Supervisors were rehabilitated, pursuant to the Government policy decision dated 12th January, 2010. But, when it came to the Instructors i.e. Non-Formal Instructors, they were left high and dry. Several writ petitions were filed, one of them was the instant writ proceedings.

(3.) There are several intervention applications, we need not pass any order thereon because the benefit being given to be applicable to all similarly situated persons.