PRAMOD SINGH @ PARMOD SINGH Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this Letters Patent Appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent of the Patna High Court, the appellant -original writ petitioner, has assailed the judgment, dated 21.6.2006, passed by the learned Single Judge in a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, being CWJC No. 6741 of 2003.

(2.) THE appellant -original writ petitioner initiated the legal battle by filing the aforesaid writ petition questioning the legality of issuance removal order from the service, by Memo No.135, dated 26.2.2003, issued by the Superintendent of Police, Railway, Katihar, as also Memo 471, dated 18.3.2003, communicating the dismissal order to the appellant -original writ petitioner, placed at Annexures 1 and 2 to the main writ petition. The father of the appellant -original writ petitioner was working as constable in Bihar Police who made an application on 30.1.1989 to the Inspector General of Police, Railway, contending that his health was not well and on that ground, he is unable to discharge hard duty on the post of constable. Therefore, he sought voluntary retirement from service and requested to appoint his son, the appellant -original writ petitioner, in his place as constable which came to be granted by Memo No. 1200 dated 13.4.1989, issued by the Railway I.G., Bihar, Patna, approving the case of the appellant -original writ petitioner for appointment.

(3.) THE father of the appellant -original writ petitioner was permitted to take voluntary retirement from service on the post of constable and later on, his son, the appellant -original writ petitioner, was appointed who, later on, came to be removed from service on the ground that the appointment was not made on the ground of compassionate basis and, as such, the appointment was made without any authority and without following the procedure of recruitment.