STATE OF BIHAR Vs. DHANANJAY KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ON 5th October, 1987, private respondent was appointed. Since then he was paid salaries. On 24.12.2002, an order was passed which was followed by yet another order dated 21.5.2003, whereby and under it was decided not to pay salaries to the private respondent.

(2.) IN the order dated 24.12.2002 it was indicated that the private respondent was asked twice to produce documents but he failed to produce the same. It was stated that on internal enquiry, it was found that the writ petitioner 'sappointment is not sustainable and, accordingly, it has been decided not to pay salaries to the private respondent. Challenging the said decision, the private respondent filed a Writ Petition which was registered as CWJC No. 7909 of Kanti Devi Versus Bank Of Baroda 2003. By the judgment and order under appeal, the said Writ Petition was allowed and the orders dated 24.12.2002 and 21.5.2003 were quashed.

(3.) THE learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the writ petitioner relied upon a forged appointment letter while he came to be appointed. It was submitted that in the rejoinder filed in the present appeal, the appellants have brought on record the appointment letter, on the strength of which the private respondent obtained appointment, and the appointment letter which was intended to be issued to the true appointee, and it was submitted that despite obtaining an opportunity to deal with the rejoinder, the private respondent has failed to do so and thereby has not denied the assertions made in the rejoinder.