DEEPAK KUMAR THAKUR Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE facts and issues involved in these writ applications are similar, therefore are heard together and disposed of by this order.

(2.) PETITIONERS were working in Pakur Collectorate on daily wage. It appears that some of the petitioners and other daily wages workers filed a writ application in Patna High Court vide C.W.J.C. No. 891 of 1998 for regularization of their services. Aforesaid writ application disposed of on 27.3.2000 and respondents were directed to prepare a panel of daily wages workers according to their seniority. It is also ordered that after preparation of panel, respondents should take steps for regular appointment, as per the circular of the State Government. It further appears that when order of Hon'ble Patna High Court not complied by respondents, then a contempt application filed vide M.J.C. No. 35 of 2001. In that contempt application, this Court directed respondents to ensure compliance of aforesaid order passed by Patna High Court. It then appears that in the year 2004, another contempt application filed vide Cont. Case (C) No. 99 of 2004 which was disposed on 24.6.2004 and following order passed: -

(3.) IT is stated in the counter -affidavit that out of aforesaid panels, altogether 73 persons appointed in different departments as peon. It is stated by petitioners that even after appointment of 73 persons, so many posts of Class -IV employees are still vacant. List of such vacancies (Annexure -5) given in W.P.(S) No. 7508 of 2006. In the counter -affidavit aforesaid statements given by the petitioners at paragraph 18 of the writ application has been admitted. In the counter -affidavit respondents did not assign reason as to why they stopped process of appointment after filling up only 73 posts, though this Court specifically gave direction to respondents to complete process of appointment by 31st of March, 2005.