DINA NATH SINGH Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has filed the present application for quashing the order dated 17.12.1996, as contained in Annexure 1, passed by respondent no. 4 - the Managing Director of the Bihar State Warehousing Corporation Patna, (here in after referred to as the corporation). By which the appointment of the petitioner as an assistant has been cancelled and for a direction to reinstate the petitioner.

(2.) THE facts, which are not in dispute, are that the Managing Director of the Corporation is competent to appoint employees of class II and Class III categories. The petitioner was holding the post of Assistant which is a class II category post.

(3.) ON 16.12.1982, the Managing Director of the Corporation engaged the petitioner on daily wages, in pursuance of which he joined on 20.12.1982. A copy of the said order has been annexed as Annexure 2. While the petitioner was working in the said capacity, the executive committee of the Corporation on 10.1.1991 took decision to regularize the services of the daily wages workers keeping in view the policy of the Government to provide employment to one lac people. A copy of the said decision of the executive committee has been annexed as Annexure 3. In pursuance of the aforesaid decision, the petitioner, along with other daily wages employees, was appointed as an Assistant on provisional basis after regularization of their services. It was clarified that the regular appointment would be made after roster clearance by the Bureau of Public Enterprises. A copy of the said order has been annexed as Annexure 4. While the petitioner was working in the said capacity, on 13.7.1995, a show cause notice, a copy of which has been annexed as Annexure 5, was issued to the petitioner as to why his appointment be not cancelled in pursuance of the direction of the State Government to cancel the appointment as the same was snot made according to law. The petitioner filed detailed show cause, stating there in that his services were regularized taking into consideration the long services rendered by him. There are other persons also, whose services have been regularized and there was no ground to terminate his service. A copy of the show -cause filed by the petitioner has been appended as Annexure 6. There after, by the impugned order dated 17.12.1996, as contained in Annexure 4, the services of the petitioner have been terminated. It further appears that on the basis of certain allegations an enquiry was conducted against the then Managing Director of the Corporation by the Member Board of Revenue and found that the appointments, made by the Managing Director, were irregular, It further appears that a writ application bearing CWJC No. 7505. at 1994 was filed by Binay Kumar and others in this court, where it transpired that an enquiry was already going on against the Managing Director and the writ application was disposed of by order dated 20.4.1995, with a direction to conclude the enquiry and take suitable action. In pursuance of the aforesaid report of the Member, Board of Revenue, the Secretary, co -operative Department, issued a direction to the Corporation to cancel the appointments of such persons, who were appointed irregularly and illegally after following the procedure and, thereafter, after the show -cause, the impugned order has been passed.