RAGHVENDRA PRATAP SINGH Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Prabhu Nath Pathak, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. Prabhat Ranjan, learned Assisting Counsel to Government Pleader No.6 for the State.

(2.) The petitioner is aggrieved by the order bearing Memo No.12402 dated 11.2016 of the Additional Secretary, Rural Works Department, Bihar, Patna, whereby the petitioner has been reverted from the post of Junior Accounts Clerk on grounds that he is a compassionate appointee and thus not entitled to the scale so granted to him in view of the Circular No.531 dated 21.2003 of the Department of Finance, Government of Bihar, Patna. The petitioner is also aggrieved by the order bearing Memo No.9297 dated 3.8.2017 of the Deputy Secretary, Rural Works Department, Bihar, Patna confirming the position as also Patna High Court CWJC No.13144 of 2017 dt.08-01-2018 2 the order contained in Memo No.1430 dated 19.8.2017 of the Superintending Engineer, Works Circle, Nalanda, whereby the petitioner has been reverted from the post of Accounts Clerk to Treasure Guard. The petitioner is also aggrieved by his posting order on the post of Treasure Guard passed by the Executive Engineer, Rural Works Department, Works Division, Hilsa bearing Memo No.1305 dated 28.6.2017. The orders also envisage recovery of alleged excess amount paid to the petitioner. Copies of the orders are impugned at Annexures 1, 2, 3 and 4 respectively.

(3.) A counter affidavit is filed and the admission at paragraph</i> 8 of the counter affidavit is sufficient to allow the writ petition together with consequential reliefs for the respondents do admit that the very order of the Additional Secretary bearing Memo No.12402 dated 2.11.2016 was also impugned in CWJC No.1276 of 2017 (Rakesh Kumar Pandey & Ors. Vs. The State of Bihar) which was heard analogous with a batch of writ petitions arising from CWJC No.9921 of 2017 (Binit Kumar & Ors. Vs. The State of Bihar & Ors) and vide judgment and order passed by this Court on 21.8.2017 the said order was quashed and set aside, a copy of which has also been placed on record vide Annexure 19 to the supplementary affidavit. The said writ petition was allowed with the following directions: