ARUN PRAKASH TIWARY Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Yugal Kishore, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned J.C. to Standing Counsel No. 11, for the State.

(2.) The petitioner is aggrieved by and seeks quashing of the order contained in memo No. 750 dated 19.4.1991 (Annexure-4) issued by Sub-Divisional Officer. Rohtas (Sasaram) by which the appointment of the petitioner as Dafadar has been stayed till further orders and for further consequential orders.

(3.) A counter affidavit has been filed on Magistrate Rohtas in which stand taken is that the selection/appointment of grade IV employees like Dafadar has to be made by a Selection Committee headed by the District Magistrate and consisting of other district level officers as per the Home (Police) Department letter No. 10129 dated 6.11.1991 (Annexure-A) whereas the Selection Committee which had selected the petitioner was headed by the sub-Divisional officer Sasaram and the same is countary to the Government letter in this regard. The further and the main ground taken in the counter affidavit is that by letter No. 711 dated 23.1.1991 the Home (Police) Department had directed not to make any. further appointment of Choukidar/Dafadar since after the said posts having been declared by the State Government as class IV employees, the matter regarding the procedure for their appointment etc. is under consideration of the State Government and unti1 a clear direction is issued by the State Government in this regard, no further appointment should be made.