Letters Patent Appeal No. 663 of 2006, Letters Patent Appeal No. 767 of 2005. Case: 1. Ajit Anand S/o Vidya Prasad, 2. Arun Kumar S/o Parash Nath Vs 1. State of Bihar, 2. Secretary, Road Construction Department, Government of Bihar, 3. Secretary, Public Health Engineering Department, Government of Bihar, 4. Commissioner cum Secretary, Water Resources Department, Government of Bihar, 5. Commissioner cum Secretary, Personal and Administrative Reforms Department, Government of Bihar, 6. Chairman, Bihar Staff Election Commission, Post Veterinary College, 7. Secretary, Bihar Staff Election Commission, Post Veterinary College, 8. Bipin Kumar Singh S/o Harichand Prasad Singh, 9. Md. Ekbal Ahmad S/o Md. Suleman. High Court of Patna (India)
| Case Number | Letters Patent Appeal No. 663 of 2006, Letters Patent Appeal No. 767 of 2005 |
| Counsel | Durga Nand Jha, Dhirendrda Nath Jha, Abhay Kumar, Ram Balak Mahto, Dilip Kumar Roy, Himanshu Kumar Akela |
| Judges | Shiva Kirti Singh & Hemant Kumar Srivastava, JJ. |
| Issue | Constitution of India, 1950 - Article 141 |
| Judgement Date | August 24, 2010 |
| Court | High Court of Patna (India) |
Judgment:
Shiva Kirti Singh & Hemant Kumar Srivastava, JJ.
-
Heard the parties.
-
Both these letters patent appeals are inter related on account of common issue as to what law has been laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court to be followed in future in relation to recruitment of apprenticeship trainees under a State Government, vide its judgment in case of U.P. State Road Transport Corporation and another vs. U.P. Parivahan Nigam Shishukhs Berozgar Sangh and others (1995) 2 SCC 1.
-
It is not in dispute that earlier also the appellants had moved this court challenging inaction on the part of the State in not following the law laid down by the Apex Court. In that case, directions were issued to the State Government to consider the cases of Holder of diploma in Engineering in the light of law laid down by the Supreme court and if necessary to frame rules or issue guidelines.
-
Prior to framing of the rules an advertisement issued for recruitment for the posts of Junior Engineer (Civil) on a fixed amount of Rs 8,000/- per month for a duration of six months only which was challenged by the appellants on the ground that such recruitment was being made without framing the rules only with a view to over-reach the judgment of the Supreme Court and direction of this court to first frame rules or issue guidelines. During the pendency of the aforesaid challenge in CWJC N0.1179 of 2004, the State Government framed the required rules and brought it to the notice of this court.The same was considered while finally disposing of CWJC No. 1179 of 2004 by order dated 17.05.2005 which is subject matter of appeal in LPA No. 767 of 2005. By that order a learned Single Judge declined to interfere with the procedure of appointment being made for a short period on contract basis but issued directions that the rule framed should be followed in its totality if regular appointments are required to be made in future. LPA No. 767 of 2005 has been preferred by only one of the three writ petitioners of CWJC No. 1179 of 2004, the remaining two petitioners accepted that judgment and order and waited for publication of fresh advertisement bearing no. 1006 issued in the year 2006. In that advertisement the terms and conditions were incorporated on the basis of rules framed by the State. That was challenged by the appellant of LPA No. 663 of 2006 by preferring CWJC No. 6937 of 2006. His prayer was to amend/ delete the condition of examination in advertisement no. 1006...
To continue reading
Request your trial