YOGENDRA RAI v. THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS

LPA No.589 of 2009 THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS Versus AJAY KUMAR SHRIVASTAVA & ANR WITH LPA No.597 of 2009 THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS Versus SURESH CHANDRA PRASAD WITH LPA No.598 of 2009 THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS Versus KESHAV KUMAR MISHRA & ANR WITH LPA No.599 of 2009 THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS Versus JAY KISHORE PARBAT WITH - 5 - LPA No.600 of 2009 THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS Versus BRIJ NATH YADAV WITH LPA No.604 of 2009 THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS Versus VISHWAMBHAR SHARMA WITH LPA No.605 of 2009 THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS Versus RAMENDRA TIWARY WITH LPA No.606 of 2009 THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS Versus MUKTI NATH CHOUDHARY WITH LPA No.607 of 2009 THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS Versus MINA KUMARI WITH LPA No.608 of 2009 THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS Versus MAHESH PRASAD YADAV & ANR WITH LPA No.609 of 2009 THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS Versus BIRENDRA PRASAD WITH LPA No.610 of 2009 THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS Versus SUNAINA DEVI WITH LPA No.611 of 2009 THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS - 6 - Versus ASHOK KUMAR CHATURVEDI@ASHOK K WITH LPA No.618 of 2009 THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS Versus NAGDEO SINGH & ANR WITH LPA No.624 of 2009 THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS Versus SHAMBHU NATH UPADHYAY WITH LPA No.629 of 2009 THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS Versus NANDJI BHAGAT WITH LPA No.632 of 2009 THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS Versus RABINDRA KUMAR SINGH & ANR WITH LPA No.633 of 2009 THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS Versus HARE RAM YADAV WITH LPA No.634 of 2009 THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS Versus RAM PRAVESH WITH LPA No.635 of 2009 THE STATE OF BIHAR &ORS Versus BACHCHA LAL SINGH WITH LPA No.636 of 2009 THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS Versus SURENDRA SHARMA WITH - 7 - LPA No.637 of 2009 THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS Versus MRITUNJAY KUMAR PRASAD WITH LPA No.638 of 2009 THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS Versus RAM NARESH CHAUDHARY WITH LPA No.639 of 2009 THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS Versus GORAKH PRASAD WITH LPA No.646 of 2009 THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS Versus BACHHA SINGH WITH LPA No.648 of 2009 THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS Versus GAYA SINGH WITH LPA No.663 of 2009 THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS Versus CHANDRA GHOSH PRASAD WITH LPA No.664 of 2009 THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS Versus PRABHU NATH RAI WITH LPA No.665 of 2009 THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS Versus PARAS NATH SINGH WITH LPA No.668 of 2009 THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS - 8 - Versus RAJENDRA YADAV WITH LPA No.669 of 2009 THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS Versus SRI BHAGWAN TIWARI WITH LPA No.670 of 2009 THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS Versus MANAN TIWARI WITH LPA No.676 of 2009 THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS Versus DEEP NARAIN PATHAK WITH LPA No.679 of 2009 THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS Versus RABINDRA CHOUBEY WITH LPA No.681 of 2009 THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS Versus VYAS PATHAK WITH LPA No.694 of 2009 STATE OF BIHAR & ORS Versus SHIVDENEE PRASAD YADAV WITH LPA No.705 of 2009 THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS Versus SUGRIVA BAITHA ------------ For the Appellants : M/S. Lalit Kishore, AAG III & Prabhakar Tekriwal, G.A. I For the Respondents : M/S. Chittaranjan Sinha, Sr. Advocate, Umesh Kumar Mishra, Suresh Prasad Singh No. I & Vitesh Kumar Singh -------- - 9 - 3 22/05/2009 Heard learned counsel for the appellants State of Bihar and learned counsel for the private respondents in various appeals. The limitation in preferring these appeals, after hearing the parties and considering the facts stated in the connected applications, is condoned. On going through the orders under appeal, we find that the writ Courts have interfered with the orders of termination challenged by the writ petitioners only on the ground that the apex Court had permitted the terminated employees, in spite of valid termination orders in 1985, to continue in service on the concerned posts till the respondent State completes the process of selection afresh. Presently the State has resorted to remove the concerned employees afresh without completing the process of selection afresh in which the affected employees who have continued could also be considered. We do not find any illegality or error in the orders passed by the writ Courts and, hence, we have no option but to dismiss these appeals preferred by the State of Bihar. They are dismissed accordingly. Before parting with these appeals, we must express our anguish over the inaction of the State respondents in not completing the process of selection which was required to be done in the light of the order of the Supreme Court dated 30.9.1986 passed in S.L.P. Nos. 12061-70 of 1986. On account of such inaction by the concerned authorities of the State of Bihar, persons like the writ petitioners, whose services were terminated in 1985, have managed to continue to - 10 - work on their respective posts for more than two decades and enjoy all the perks. Their termination was found valid long back by the Division Bench of this Court as well as by the apex Court as they did not have even the necessary qualification in terms of the Recruitment Rules for the post of Teacher in Basic school . It is understandable that in such a situation the vested interests are expected to exert pressure and abort the selection process again. Hence, the State authorities are directed to complete the selection process in accordance with law and the aforesaid order of the Apex Court which still governs the field, within a period of six months from today. Failure of this time limit will be viewed seriously as an act of gross contempt. The State shall also be at liberty to enquire and hold responsible the officials who were earlier required to complete the selection process but failed to do so for no good reason. (Shiva Kirti Singh, ACJ.) (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)