PRAMOD SINGH Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition has been filed for quashing of the order vide Memo No. 135 dated 26.2.2003 issued by the Superintendent of Police Railway, Katihar and for further quashing of the follow up order vide Memo No. 471 dated 18.3.03 by which the petitioner has been removed from service on the ground that his appointment was not made after following the process of selection. Petitioner further claims for a direction to the respondents to reinstate him with all consequential benefits.

(2.) THE case of the petitioner is that his father Tirath Narayan Singh was working as constable in Bihar Police and on 30.1.1989 he made an application before the Inspector General of Police, Railway, stating that his health was very poor and on that account he was facing trouble in discharging hard duty on the post of constable and, thus, he may be permitted to voluntarily retire and in his place his son, the petitioner, may be appointed on the post of constable. After some further reminders the request made by the petitioner's father was accepted and by Memo No. 1200 dated 13.4.1989 an order was issued by the Railway I.G. Bihar, Patna approving the case of the petitioner for appointment. Subsequently the petitioner was appointed and his father voluntarily retired from service. THE petitioner thereafter joined his post and continued on the same until all of a sudden on 26.2.2003 the impugned order was issued removing him from service on the ground that the appointment has not been made as on compassionate appointment either or on the recommendation of the appointment committee and, therefore, the Government treated his appointment as illegal.

(3.) THE facts of this case are on entirely different footing from that of the case of Ashok Kumar and it is squarely covered by the decision in Sudhir Kumar's case reported in 2000(3) PLJR 717.