Prabhuwan Roy v. The State of Bihar & Ors.

.... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ajay Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent nos. 1 to 4 : Mr. Ajay Behari Sinha, S.C.-19 For the Respondent nos. 5 & 6 : Mr. Shekhar Singh, Advocate For the Respondent nos. 7 & 8 : Mr. Siddhartha Prasad, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA PRASAD VERMA ORAL ORDER 4 29-01-2013 The petitioners have approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the reliefs, enumerated in para-1 of the writ petition, which are reproduced herein below: “That this petition is being filed for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the following:- (a) Order so far relates to the petitioners, contained in Memo No. 929/U.D.D., Patna dated 31.12.2005, Patna High Court CWJC No.1615 of 2006 (4) dt.29-01-2013 by which the services of Junior Engineers, who are on deputation at Patna Regional Development Authority for more than 3 years have been repatriated to their respective parent department i.e. BISCOMAUN with immediate effect. (b) Consequential order relieving the petitioners from Patna Regional Development Authority (in short P.R.D.A.) as contained in Memo No. 3/C P.R.D.A. dated 3.1.2006. The petitioners apart from the above also pray for issuance of writ the nature of Mandamus, commanding the respondents concerned for following:- (a) To absorb the services of the petitioners under the Urban Development Department, Government of Bihar. (b) To restrain the respondent concerned from returning the petitioner’s services back to their parent organisation. The petitioners further pray for issuance of any other writ/writs, order/orders and/or directions/directions to which the petitioners are found entitled.” Patna High Court CWJC No.1615 of 2006 (4) dt.29-01-2013 When this writ petition was taken up for hearing for the first time on 19.2.2007, then in view of the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, it was ordered to be listed after disposal of L.P.A. No. 720 of 2006 and its analogous cases, as the issues involved in the present proceeding and in the aforesaid L.P.A. No. 720 of 2006 were/are similar and identical. It is admitted case of the parties that now L.P.A. No. 720 of 2006 along with L.P.A. No. 608 of 2006 and other analogous matters have finally been disposed of by a Division Bench of this Court by a judgment and order dated 19th April,

2010. The aforesaid judgment and order passed by the Division Bench of this Court has been brought on record as Annexure-26 to the supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of the petitioners. The State of Bihar and its functionaries, being aggrieved by the aforesaid judgment and order dated 19th April, 2010 passed in L.P.A. No. 608 of 2006 and its analogous matters, preferred altogether four SLPs before the Hon’ble Apex Court and all the four SLPs. were heard and dismissed by the Hon’ble Apex Court by an order dated 24.1.2011, which has also been brought on record as Annexure-27 to the aforesaid supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of the petitioners. It would be useful to notice here that pursuant to Patna High Court CWJC No.1615 of 2006 (4) dt.29-01-2013 certain orders passed by this Court, the services of several employees were repatriated to BISCOMAUN. Orders of repatriation were challenged before this Court in several writ petitions, but they failed. Thereafter, L.P.A. No. 608 of 2006 and LPA No. 720 of 2006 and other analogous appeals were filed by different employees challenging the order of the writ Court. Since the issues involved in those L. P. As. were common and identical, therefore, all those L. P. As. were heard together and were disposed of by a common judgment and order dated 19th April, 2010 (Annexure-26). Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties are unanimous in their submissions that issues of facts involved in the present proceeding and that of in L.P.A Nos. 608 of 2006 and 720 of 2006 and other analogous matters were/are identical and similar. However, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent-State has tried to make only one distinction that now pursuant to the impugned order, the petitioners have joined BISCOMAUN and they have received some salary there. Therefore, for the interregnum period the respondent-State of Bihar may not be directed to pay the arrears of salary to the petitioners. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners Patna High Court CWJC No.1615 of 2006 (4) dt.29-01-2013 as also learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent- BISCOMAUN have refuted the submissions of the learned counsel appearing for the respondent-State and has submitted that similar situations were prevailing in those L.P.As as well, and all the issues have been conclusively resolved by a Division Bench of this Court in para-24 of the aforesaid judgment dated 19th April,

2010. Therefore, according to them this matter is also fit to be disposed of exactly in same term and with similar directions. For convenience paragraph-24 of the judgment and order dated 19th April, 2010 passed in LPA No. 608 of 2006 and other analogous matters is reproduced herein below: “In the light of what has been discussed and held above, it follows as a logical corollary that all the appeals must succeed except L.P.A. No. 1110 of 2004. Accordingly, judgment and orders under challenge in other appeals are set aside. Further, the impugned orders or actions under challenge whereby the appellants have either been ordered to be repatriated or are threatened with repatriation are quashed. The respondent-authorities are directed to treat the deputation of appellants not as simple deputation but one under a valid policy for the Patna High Court CWJC No.1615 of 2006 (4) dt.29-01-2013 purpose of rehabilitation or absorption through the device of transfer of service and to take follow up action, if required, within three months. The respondents will also keep in mind and act as per earlier judgments which were accepted by them and similarly situated employees were absorbed because the State and its officials, i.e., the respondents are duty bound to ensure equality of treatment to the appellants. Till such decision or follow up actions are taken the appellants shall be allowed to continue on the posts which they held on deputation and for all practical purposes they shall be treated to be the employees of the concerned departments where they are/were working on deputation. The writ petitions are allowed to the aforesaid extent. It is made clear that if, on account of the judgment and orders under appeals any of the appellants whose appeals have been allowed have been repatriated from their posts under the State or dismissed from service, such impugned or consequential orders of repatriation or dismissal shall stand quashed and they shall be reinstated and allowed to work with all consequential Patna High Court CWJC No.1615 of 2006 (4) dt.29-01-2013 benefits. In the facts of the case there shall be no order as to costs.” (Emphasis supplied by me). After having heard the parties and on consideration of the materials available on record including the judgment and order dated 19th April, 2010 (Annexure-26), this Court is of the considered opinion that the present writ petition is also fit to be disposed of exactly in the same term and with similar directions as has been done in LPA No. 608 of 2006 and other analogous matters particularly paragraph-24 of the judgment and orders, which has been reproduced above. The State of Bihar was a party in the aforesaid LPA No. 608 of 2006 and in other analogous matters. Therefore, the State of Bihar and its functionaries cannot be permitted to draw a distinction between the case of the petitioners and with that of the other employees, who were parties in the aforesaid LPA No. 608 of 2006 and other analogous matters. In the result, this writ application is disposed of exactly in the same terms and with similar directions, as has been done by judgment and order dated 19th April, 2010 (Annexure- 26). RPS/- (Birendra Prasad Verma, J)